Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34659426›Full record

ReviewDrugs in context2021

Vitamins, supplements and COVID-19: a review of currently available evidence.

Lauren L Speakman, Sarah M Michienzi, Melissa E Badowski

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs in context, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lauren L SpeakmanDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Pharmacy, Chicago, IL, USA.
Sarah M MichienziDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Pharmacy, Chicago, IL, USA.
Melissa E BadowskiDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Pharmacy, Chicago, IL, USA.
University of Illinois Chicago · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been an information overload of health data (both accurate and inaccurate) available to the public. With vitamins and supplements being readily accessible, many have turned to using them in an effort to combat the virus. The purpose of this review was to analyse clinical trials regarding vitamins and supplements for the treatment of COVID-19 infections.

methodsArticles were identified through a literature search utilizing online databases and bibliographic review.

resultsA total of seven articles were identified for review. All articles evaluated the use of vitamins and supplements for the treatment of COVID-19. Drug therapies included oral vitamin D, intravenous and oral vitamin C, oral vitamin D/magnesium/vitamin B12, oral zinc, oral combination zinc/ascorbic acid, and intravenous alpha-lipoic acid. The end points of each study varied, including the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, mortality, rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, negativity of COVID-19 tests, oxygen requirements, and symptom burden.

conclusionOf the vitamins and supplements that were studied, vitamin D presented the most promising data demonstrating significant decreases in oxygen requirements, need for ICU treatment, SARS-CoV-2 RNA test positivity, and mortality. All of these benefits were exhibited in hospitalized patients. Other vitamins and supplements that were evaluated in studies did not demonstrate any statistically significant benefits. Common shortcomings of the articles included generally small sample sizes, varying sites of study (which could determine the virus variant), a lack of standard of care as background therapy, and utilization of doses that were higher than standard.

Indexed as

coronavirusCOVID-19SARS-COV-2severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirussupplementvitamin

Identifiers

PMID34659426
PMCPMC8496749
OpenAlexW3204916401

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.