Vitamin D and acute respiratory infection: secondary analysis of a previous randomised controlled trial and updated meta-analyses
Bolland, M. J.; Avenell, A.; Grey, A.; Gamble, G. D.
Show abstract
BackgroundRecent meta-analyses concluded that vitamin D supplementation can prevent acute respiratory infection (ARI). However, the findings were heavily influenced by results from two arms of a six-arm cluster-randomised trial that were analysed without accounting for the cluster trial design. We have used publicly available data to provide results from the remaining four unpublished trial arms and to reanalyse the meta-analyses, accounting for the cluster trial design. MethodsThe intracluster correlation co-efficient (ICC) and design effect were estimated. We then calculated the risk reduction (RR) of ARI from summary statistics, adjusting for the design effect, individually for the five different vitamin D treatment groups (four previously unpublished) and for all the vitamin D groups pooled. For this trial, individual patient data were used to estimate the effect of vitamin D on ARI risk and number of ARIs, adjusting for the cluster trial design, using random-effects models. Finally, we reanalysed the most recent trial-level meta-analysis, including the trial data generated by the correct analysis of the cluster randomized trial. ResultsThere were 744 trial participants (6 treatment groups, 21 clusters, mean cluster size 35.4). The ICC was 0.08 (95% CI 0.02-0.14) and design effect 3.75. In analyses based on summary statistics, there was no statistically significant effect of vitamin D on ARI risk in any individual treatment group, or when groups were pooled (RR 0.75, 95%CI 0.50-1.13). In individual patient data analyses, there was also no statistically significant effect of vitamin D on the ARI risk or number of ARIs in any treatment group, or when pooled: odds ratio 0.58 (0.26-1.29), rate ratio 0.70 (0.44-1.12), respectively. Update of the previous meta-analysis showed no effect of vitamin D on ARI either when data from the two arms of the trial, or when all trial arms were incorporated (RR 0.98, 0.96-1.00, P=0.10 both analyses). ConclusionsOverall, vitamin D supplementation had no effect on the risk of an ARI or on the number of ARIs in this trial or in a re-analysis of the most recent meta-analysis. The results of the updated meta-analysis do not suggest that vitamin D supplementation would reduce the risk of Covid 19.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Vitamin D3 Supplementation at 5000 IU Daily for the Prevention of Influenza-Like Illness in Healthcare Workers: A Randomized Clinical Trial 92%
- COVID-19 mortality risk correlates inversely with vitamin D3 status, and a mortality rate close to zero could theoretically be achieved at 50 ng/ml 25(OH)D3: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis 91%
- Methodological quality of recommendations on vitamin D and calcium – a systematic review of bone health guidelines 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Investigator-initiated versus industry-sponsored trials – Visibility and relevance of randomized controlled trials in clinical practice guidelines (IMPACT) 92%
- Does pre-notification increase questionnaire response rates: a nested randomised control trial 91%
- Does advance contact with research participants increase response to questionnaires: A Systematic Review and meta-Analysis 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Vitamin D Supplements for Prevention of Covid-19 or other Acute Respiratory Infections: a Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial (CORONAVIT) 92%
- Prophylaxis for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis 91%
- No evidence of clinical efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection with oxygen requirement: results of a study using routinely collected data to emulate a target trial 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infection triggers for acute myocardial infarction and stroke: systematic review protocol 92%
- COVID-19 and pregnancy: An umbrella review of clinical presentation, vertical transmission, and maternal and perinatal outcomes 92%
- Colchicine use in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- The effect of calcium supplementation in people under 35 years old: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials 91%
- The Proportion of Randomized Controlled Trials That Inform Clinical Practice: A Longitudinal Cohort Study of Trials Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov 90%
- Systematic analysis of electronic health records identifies drugs reducing risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and severity 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.