ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2026
Effect of vitamin D supplementation on cardiovascular outcomes: randomized trials revisited.
Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2026. 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.
- Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Status Across Vertebrate Species: A Comparative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Vitamin D and Health: Establishing Causal Relationships Through Observational Evidence and Hill's Criteria in a Biological Framework.Nutrients · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to estimate the effects of vitamin D supplementation on cardiovascular diseases in populations with different baseline vitamin D distributions, by emulating the VITAL and D-Health trials within the UK Biobank. We emulated randomized trials using subcohorts of the UK Biobank selected to match the inclusion criteria of the VITAL and D-Health trials (n = 237,502 and 185,809, respectively). Exposures were defined as increases in serum 25-hydroxyvitamin-D concentrations of 30 nmol/L and 38 nmol/L, corresponding to the intervention effects in the trials. Outcomes included cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and major adverse cardiovascular events. Expected hazard ratios over trial median follow-up durations of 5.3 and 5.7 years were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Vitamin D insufficiency was more common in the UK Biobank than in the original trials. When participants were weighted to match the trial baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin-D distributions, the expected effects became more similar to the largely null findings reported in the original trials. By contrast, among individuals with vitamin D insufficiency or deficiency, increases in 25-hydroxyvitamin-D concentration as achieved in the trials were associated with significantly lower risks of cardiovascular outcomes, except ischemic stroke. For cardiovascular mortality, hazard ratios ranged from 0.74 (95% CI 0.62-0.88) to 0.79 (95% CI 0.69-0.91) across both trial emulations. The largely null findings observed in the trials may partly reflect that the trial populations were predominantly vitamin D-replete. Our emulated trials suggest that substantial cardiovascular benefits from vitamin D supplementation may be expected among populations with low vitamin D status.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42484779What 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.