Loading...
 
Toggle Health Problems and D

Ignoring dose size etc, meta-analysis concludes that Vitamin D does not help (stroke risk in this case) – Aug 2022


Vitamin D supplementation and risk of stroke: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Front Neurol. 2022 Aug 18;13:970111 doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.970111
Jia Fu 1 , Junfang Sun 2 , Chao Zhang 3

Background: Previous observational studies have supported the hypothesis that vitamin D supplementation protects against stroke. However, several current intervention studies contradict this observation. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to investigate further the association between vitamin D supplementation and the risk of stroke.

Methods: This meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement and included all the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that analyzed the relationship between vitamin D supplementation and the risk of stroke. A literature search strategy was established, and the following Medical Search Terms (MeSH) were used: "vitamin D," "Calcitriol," "Calcifediol," "Cholecalciferol," "25-Hydroxyvitamin D 2," "ergocalciferols," "stroke," and stroke-derived terms. We searched for articles published before January 2022 in several databases, namely, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library. We also reviewed references included in relevant published meta-analyses and searched the http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov website for additional RCTs. The Q test and I 2 were utilized to assess the degree of heterogeneity among the studies. Review Manager 5.3 and STATA16.0 software programs were used to assess the literature quality and perform statistical analyses.

Results: In total, twenty-four RCTs (86,202 participants) were included. There was no statistical heterogeneity among the RCTs (I 2 = 0.0%, P = 0.94) included in this meta-analysis. We determined that vitamin D supplementation was not associated with a reduced risk of stroke compared with the placebo (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.93-1.13, P = 0.65). In total, 10 studies only included women, and 14 studies included women and men among the 24 RCTs. Therefore, we performed a subgroup analysis based on sex. After the subgroup analysis, the effect remained statistically insignificant (mixed-sex group: RR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.93-1.22, P = 0.37, women group: RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.86-1.13, P = 0.80). The results were generally comparable, based on age, body mass index (BMI), follow-up period, baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels, the designated endpoint, latitude, vitamin D dosage, type of vitamin D administered, and an absence or presence of concurrent calcium supplementation (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: Our study revealed that additional vitamin D supplementation did not reduce the risk of stroke. Therefore, additional RCTs of similar design should not be encouraged to assess any association between vitamin D supplementation and reduced stroke risk.
 Download the PDF from VitaminDWiki


VitaminDWiki Stroke category contains

109 items in stroke category - see also Overview Stroke and vitamin D,
Overview Hypertension and Vitamin D  Overview Cardiovascular and vitamin D

Stroke more likely if low Vitamin D

Post-Stroke worse if low Vitamin D

Post-Stroke better if add Vitamin D

Post-Stroke better if Vitamin D actually gets to cells


VitaminDWiki - 7 Stroke Meta-analyses

This list is automatically updated


VitaminDWiki - 6 Stroke Interventions

This list is automatically updated


10+ types of problems with some meta-analyses:

  1. Assumes that as with drugs, the same dose size was given by all trials
    Many Meta-analyses actually reject trials that vary the dose size with the person
  2. Assumes that as with drugs, genes do not need to be considered
  3. Assumes that as with drugs, gut health does not need to be considered
  4. Assumes that as with drugs, skin-color does not need to be considered
  5. Assumes that as with drugs, obesity does not need to be considered
  6. Assumes that as with drugs, co-factors do not need to be considered
  7. Assumes that as with drugs, assumes daily dosing ( infrequent dosing is often better with Vitamin D)
  8. Assumes that as with drugs, the same substance was given by all trials
    Treats as the same: D3, D2, Calcidiol, oral, injection, topical, nanoemulsion, etc.
  9. Assumes that as with drugs, a loading dose was not even considered
  10. Assumes that as with drugs, the intervention will act quickly
    thus the trial can be completed in a month or so (drugs) , rather 3-9 months (Vitamin D)

There is a big need to develop a meta-analysis for nutrients
Study conclusion: "Therefore, additional RCTs of similar design should not be encouraged to assess any association between vitamin D supplementation and reduced stroke risk".


Created by admin. Last Modification: Monday September 5, 2022 20:37:41 GMT-0000 by admin. (Version 15)

Attached files

ID Name Comment Uploaded Size Downloads
18379 Stroke meta_CompressPdf.pdf PDF 2022 admin 05 Sep, 2022 18:32 301.09 Kb 27
See any problem with this page? Report it (WORKS NOV 2021)