Dataset Information

Prenatal vitamin D supplementation and child respiratory health: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT: Background: Systematic review and meta-analyses of observational studies on maternal vitamin D status and risk of respiratory allergic conditions indicated that mothers who had supplementation during pregnancy could decrease the risk of recurrent wheeze or asthma in their offspring.

Objectives: We conducted this meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials with the primary intention of detecting the effect of prenatal vitamin D supplementation on the offspring's asthma. Secondary outcomes under respiratory health include eczema, lower respiratory tract infections, Immunoglobulin E positive test, upper respiratory tract infections, and allergic rhinitis.

Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases was performed to retrieve randomized controlled trials. Risk Ratio with 95% confidence intervals was computed from dichotomous data using a random-effects model, with I² >50% representing notable heterogeneity.

Results: Six clinical trials met the inclusion criteria, involving a total of 2898 subjects (1461 experimental group and 1437 control group). There was non-significant inverse relationship between vitamin D intake during pregnancy and the occurrence of asthma in offspring (pooled RR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.69-1.15, I ² = 46% and Z-static = 0.90, P-value = 0.37). There is no significant difference in the risk of assessed childhood respiratory problems due to maternal supplementation of vitamin D during pregnancy.

Conclusion and implications: Currently, there is no fertile evidence to promote vitamin D supplementation in pregnancy for childhood respiratory health. Future clinical trials should emphasize early initiation of vitamin D supplementation, consider 6 weeks to 6 months postnatal critical window for vitamin D deficiency for offspring, lower risk dose of vitamin D, and identify different phenotypes of asthma and response to vitamin D supplementation.

SUBMITTER: Tareke AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7691606 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prenatal vitamin D supplementation and child respiratory health: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Tareke Amare Abera AA Hadgu Addis Alem AA Ayana Andualem Mossie AM Zerfu Taddese Alemu TA

The World Allergy Organization journal 20201121 12

<h4>Background</h4>Systematic review and meta-analyses of observational studies on maternal vitamin D status and risk of respiratory allergic conditions indicated that mothers who had supplementation during pregnancy could decrease the risk of recurrent wheeze or asthma in their offspring.<h4>Objectives</h4>We conducted this meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials with the primary intention of detecting the effect of prenatal vitamin D supplementation on the offspring's asthma. Secondary o ...[more]

PMID: 33294117

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveVitamin D supplementation may be a simple preventive measure against respiratory tract infections (RTIs) but evidence from randomized controlled trials is inconclusive. We aimed to systematically summarize results from interventions studying the protective effect of vitamin D supplementation on clinical and laboratory confirmed RTIs in healthy adults and children.MethodsMedline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL were screened from inception until present (last updated in January 2016) completed by a search of the grey literature, clinical trial registers and conference abstracts. We included randomized trials comparing vitamin D versus placebo or no treatment. Two independent reviewers were responsible for study selection and data extraction. Cochrane's risk of bias tool and the GRADE approach were used for quality assessment. Estimates were pooled with random-effects models. Heterogeneity was explored by sub-group and meta-regression analyses.ResultsOf 2627 original hits, 15 trials including 7053 individuals were ultimately eligible. All used oral cholecalciferol. We found a 6% risk reduction with vitamin D3 supplementation on clinical RTIs, but the result was not statistically significant (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.00). Heterogeneity was large (I-square 57%) and overall study quality was low. There were too few studies to reliably assess a potential risk reduction of laboratory confirmed RTI. Evidence was insufficient to demonstrate an association between vitamin D supplementation and risk of clinical RTI in sub-groups with vitamin D deficiency.ConclusionsIn previously healthy individuals vitamin D supplementation does not reduce the risk of clinical RTIs. However, this conclusion is based on a meta-analysis where the included studies differed with respect to population, baseline vitamin D levels and study length. This needs to be considered when interpreting the results. Future trials should focus on vitamin D deficient individuals and apply more objective and standardized outcome measurements.

Project description:A 2017 meta-analysis of data from 25 randomised controlled trials of vitamin D supplementation for the prevention of acute respiratory infections revealed a protective effect of the intervention. Since then, 20 new RCTs have been completed. Systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of vitamin D for ARI prevention using a random effects model. Pre-specified sub-group analyses were done to determine whether effects of vitamin D on risk of ARI varied according to baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) concentration or dosing regimen. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry from inception to 1st May 2020. Double-blind RCTs of supplementation with vitamin D or calcidiol, of any duration, were eligible if they were approved by a Research Ethics Committee and if ARI incidence was collected prospectively and pre-specified as an efficacy outcome. Aggregate data, stratified by baseline 25(OH)D concentration, were obtained from study authors. The study was registered with PROSPERO (no. CRD42020190633). We identified 45 eligible RCTs (total 73,384 participants). Data were obtained for 46,331 (98.0%) of 47,262 participants in 42 studies, aged 0 to 95 years. For the primary comparison of vitamin D supplementation vs. placebo, the intervention reduced risk of ARI overall (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99; P for heterogeneity 0.01). No statistically significant effect of vitamin D was seen for any of the sub-groups defined by baseline 25(OH)D concentration. However, protective effects were seen for trials in which vitamin D was given using a daily dosing regimen (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93); at daily dose equivalents of 400-1000 IU (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89); and for a duration of ≤12 months (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.93). No significant interaction was seen between allocation to vitamin D vs. placebo and dose frequency, dose size, or study duration. Vitamin D did not influence the proportion of participants experiencing at least one serious adverse event (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.09). Risk of bias within individual studies was assessed as being low for all but three trials. A funnel plot showed left-sided asymmetry (P=0.008, Egger's test). Vitamin D supplementation was safe and reduced risk of ARI, despite evidence of significant heterogeneity across trials. Protection was associated with administration of daily doses of 400-1000 IU vitamin D for up to 12 months. The relevance of these findings to COVID-19 is not known and requires investigation. None.

Project description:Vitamin D is indicated to be beneficial for the prevention and treatment of both respiratory health and mental health problems, while mental health issues are a common consequence of diseases of the respiratory system. The aim of the presented systematic review was to gather available evidence regarding the influence of the supplementation of vitamin D on mental health in adults with respiratory system diseases obtained within randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The systematic review was conducted on the basis of the PubMed and Web of Science databases in agreement with the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), while being registered within the database of the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42020155779). A total of 8514 studies published before September 2021 were screened and 5 RCTs were included, which were assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. Screening, inclusion, reporting, and assessment were conducted by two researchers independently. The studies focused on the assessment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but also increased susceptibility to respiratory tract infections, pulmonary tuberculosis, and bronchial asthma. The studies were conducted for various periods of time-from 2 months to a year-while the dose of vitamin D applied was also diverse-from 4000 IU applied daily, to 100,000 IU applied weekly, or monthly. The psychological measures applied within the studies allowed the assessment, mainly, of quality of life, but also well-being, and depression. For the majority of studies, some concerns regarding risk of bias were defined, resulting from the randomization process and selection of reported results; however, for one study, the risk was even defined as high. Within the included studies, three studies confirmed a beneficial effect of vitamin D (including those with a high risk of bias), but two studies did not confirm it. Taking into account the evidence gathered, in spite of a positive influence of vitamin D on mental health in individuals with increased susceptibility to respiratory tract infections and bronchial asthma, the conducted systematic review is not a strong confirmation of the beneficial effect of the supplementation of vitamin D on mental health in adults with respiratory system diseases.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious 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.MethodsThis 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.ResultsIn 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).ConclusionOur 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.

Dataset Information

Prenatal vitamin D supplementation and child respiratory health: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Publications

Prenatal vitamin D supplementation and child respiratory health: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets