SynthesisNutrients2020
The Role of Vitamin D in the Development of Diabetes Post Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Literature Review.
Synthesis in Nutrients, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Therapeutic Screening of Herbal Remedies for the Management of Diabetes.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are more likely to later develop diabetes. Evidence from some previous reviews suggests that low vitamin D status during pregnancy increases the risk of developing GDM, but whether vitamin D during pregnancy also influences the risk of diabetes post GDM is less well studied. Thus, the aim of this systematic literature review was to summarize the current available literature on that topic. This review considered observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Five databases were searched. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed. A total of six studies were included: three observational studies and three RCTs. Findings were inconsistent across the six included studies. However, when considering RCTs only, the findings more strongly suggested that vitamin D supplementation during and after pregnancy did not have an influence on markers of diabetes development or diabetes development post GDM. This systematic review highlights inconsistent findings on the associations between vitamin D supplementation or concentration during and after pregnancy and markers of diabetes development or diabetes development post GDM; and although results from randomized interventional studies more strongly suggested no associations, the conclusion holds a high degree of uncertainty.
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.