ReviewCurrent developments in nutrition2026
Vitamin D Supplementation for Steatotic Liver Disease: an Updated Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-analysis of Randomized and Nonrandomized Interventional Studies.
Review in Current developments in nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is among the leading causes of chronic liver disease, with few approved treatment options. Vitamin D supplementation has been proposed as a safe and efficacious supplement intervention for MASLD. The current study aimed to systematically evaluate the effect of vitamin D supplementation in any preparation on hepatic (histological, radiological, and biomarker) and metabolic parameters (glucose regulation, lipid profile, and indices of obesity) in patients diagnosed with steatotic liver disease. These effects were compared with patient baseline and/or placebo response, where available. MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were systematically searched for relevant randomized or nonrandomized studies of intervention. Screening and data extraction were completed by independent pairs of reviewers. Effects were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses. One-stage dose-response analysis was performed for alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and γ-glutamyl transferase. The effect of baseline vitamin D, ALT, body mass index, and vitamin D response on treatment response was explored via metaregression. Treatment efficacy was evaluated in subgroup analyses according to patient and intervention characteristics. A total of 28 studies (21 randomized controlled trials) were analyzed. Statistically significant improvements were noted in FibroScan parameters, liver enzymes, insulin resistance, serum triglyceride, and high-density lipoprotein. However, the magnitude of effect regarding these improvements was smaller than thresholds for clinical benefit, and analyses demonstrated inconsistencies. Subgroup analyses failed to identify a specific subset of patients with MASLD benefiting from supplementation. Vitamin D supplementation was safe and well-tolerated, but no meaningful clinical benefit was identified for hepatic or metabolic parameters of interest in MASLD. This trial was registered at PROSPERO as CRD420251125809.
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.