ReviewNutrients2026
Vitamin D: Nutritional Programming During the First 1000 Days of Life.
Review in Nutrients, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe first 1000 days of life represent a critical window for developmental programming, during which specific nutritional exposures, such as vitamin D levels, may influence long-term health trajectories. Vitamin D plays a central role in skeletal development, but increasing evidence also supports its possible involvement in immune, metabolic, and neurodevelopmental processes during early life. In this narrative review, we summarize current evidence on the biological functions of vitamin D across the first 1000 days, focusing on its roles in skeletal, immune, metabolic, and neurodevelopmental processes, and its potential role as a programming factor.
methodsWe conducted our research using the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. We included systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and high-quality observational studies published from 2015 onward, focusing on pregnancy, neonatal life, and early childhood.
resultsVitamin D acts through placental, epigenetic, skeletal, immune, metabolic, and neurodevelopmental pathways that are particularly active during early development. Low maternal or early-life vitamin D status has been associated with adverse birth outcomes and impaired bone health. It has also been linked to increased susceptibility to infections and allergic diseases, altered metabolic trajectories, and mild neurodevelopmental differences. Evidence from supplementation trials remains heterogeneous, with benefits appearing more consistent in populations with baseline deficiency.
conclusionsVitamin D fulfills several biological plausibility criteria for a potential early-life programming factor, although current human evidence remains heterogeneous.
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.