MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Vitamin D Supplementation for Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo: A Systematic Review

2024· review· en· W4392788872 on OpenAlexaff
Xinyuan Hong, Marina Christ-Franco, David Moher, Darren Tse, Daniel Lelli, David G. Schramm, Lisa Caulley, Georgios Kontorinis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenign paroxysmal positional vertigoMedicineRandomized controlled trialOdds ratioConfidence intervalBetahistineInternal medicineMeta-analysisPediatricsClinical trialVertigoSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (BPPV), a neuro-otological disorder accounting for nearly one-half of patients with peripheral vestibular dysfunction, is commonly attributed to displaced otoconia. These have been shown to have a biomineralization close to that of bone, and Vitamin D deficiency has been associated with BPPV. Objective: We aim to systematically review the available literature on Vitamin D supplementation and BPPV intensity and recurrence in adults. Design: We systematically reviewed the available literature on Vitamin D supplementation and BPPV intensity and recurrence. Articles were identified through searches of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Current Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov as well as manual reviews of references, from 1947 to April 2020. The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (Trial Registration: CRD42020183195). Results: A total of 179 abstracts were identified and screened by two independent reviewers. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, six studies were selected and subjected to a quality assessment. In one randomized clinical trial (RCT), Vitamin D supplementation was found to reduce annual recurrence rate of vertigo in patient with BPPV and subnormal serum Vitamin D levels compared to placebo (odds ratio [OR] 0.69, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.54, 0.90). Non-randomized clinical trials demonstrated the possibility of a null effect in the random effects model (0.08[0.00, 1.56]). The RCT was the only study to be considered as low risk of bias in the overall evaluation. All of the non-randomized studies were assessed as serious risk of bias. Conclusions: The intervention studies identified consistently demonstrated a decrease in BPPV recurrence with supplementation of Vitamin D in patients with subnormal Vitamin D levels. Although there is a paucity of high-quality studies, the present literature does highlight a role for optimization of Vitamin D levels in patients with BPPV.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.006
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVestibular and auditory disorders→French-language works237,207→