Trial reportEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2018
Vitamin D
Trial report in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A blueprint for vitamin D fortification in sugar: stability and health impact.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
- Fortification of Staple Foods for Household Use with Vitamin D: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.Nutrients · 2023Review
- The Effects of Vitamin D Fortified Products on Bone Biomarkers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Iranian journal of public health · 2022Review
- Correlation of selected stress associated factors with vitamin D deficiency in Jordanian men and women.International journal of general medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThe effect of vitamin D on glycemic status of diabetes patients is controversial. The objective was to assess the effect of vitamin D SUBJECTS/
methodsIn this randomized triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 102 patients (34 males and 68 females) aged 31-74 years with type 2 diabetes were randomized to receive either 250 ml unfortified or 250 ml 1000 IU vitamin D
resultsSerum 25-hydroxy vitamin D concentrations improved in the fortified milk group compared to the control group (+14 ± 20 vs. +4 ± 17 ng/ml; P = 0.001). Both groups showed significant increases in serum calcium (P < 0.01) and decreases in total cholesterol, waist and hip circumference, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure (P < 0.001). Also, there was a significant reduction in body mass index of fortified milk group (P < 0.001). None of these changes were statistically significant between the two groups. Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) significantly decreased in both groups with a more remarkable reduction in the plain milk consumers, making a significant between-group difference (7.5% compared to 3.1%; P = 0.01).
conclusionsOverall, daily consumption of one cup of milk containing 1000 IU vitamin D
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.