• Int. J. Clin. Pract. · Nov 2021

    Review

    Vitamin D recommendations in clinical guidelines: A systematic review, quality evaluation and analysis of potential predictors.

    • Fraile NavarroDavidDHealth Centre Dr Mendiguchia Carriche, Servicio Madrileño de Salud, Leganes, Madrid, Spain.Primary Care, Servicio Madrileño de Salud, Madrid, Spain.Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia., López García-FrancoAlbertoAHealth Centre Dr Mendiguchia Carriche, Servicio Madrileño de Salud, Leganes, Madrid, Spain.Primary Care, Servicio Madrileño de Salud, Madrid, Spain., Ena Niño de Guzmán, Montserrat Rabassa, Rocío Zamanillo Campos, Héctor Pardo-Hernández, Ignacio Ricci-Cabello, Carlos Canelo-Aybar, Jose F Meneses-Echavez, Juan José Yepes-Nuñez, Jesse Kuindersma, Ignasi Gich Saladich, and Pablo Alonso-Coello.
    • Health Centre Dr Mendiguchia Carriche, Servicio Madrileño de Salud, Leganes, Madrid, Spain.
    • Int. J. Clin. Pract. 2021 Nov 1; 75 (11): e14805.

    BackgroundVitamin D has been widely promoted for bone health through supplementation and fortification of the general adult population. However, there is growing evidence that does not support these strategies. Our aim is to review the quality and recommendations on vitamin D nutritional and clinical practice guidelines and to explore predictive factors for their direction and strength.MethodsWe searched three databases and two guideline repositories from 2010 onwards. We performed a descriptive analysis, a quality appraisal using AGREE II scores (Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation) and a bivariate analysis evaluating the association between direction and strength of recommendations, AGREE II domains' scores and pre-specified characteristics.ResultsWe included 34 guidelines, 44.1% recommended, 26.5% suggested and 29.4% did not recommend vitamin D supplementation. Guidelines that scored higher for "editorial independence" and "overall quality score" were less likely to recommend or suggest vitamin D supplementation (median 68.8 vs 35.4; P = .001 and 58.3 vs 37.5; P = .02). Guidance produced by government organisations and those that reported source of funding were associated with higher AGREE II scores. Unclear role of source of funding was associated with recommending or suggesting vitamin D supplementation (P = .034). Editorial independence was an independent predictor for recommending or suggesting vitamin D supplementation (OR 1.09; CI95% 1.02 to 1.16; P = .006).ConclusionsPolicymakers, clinicians and patients should be aware that lower quality guidelines and those reporting conflicts of interest are more likely to promote vitamin D supplementation. Guideline organisations should improve the quality of their recommendations' development and the management of conflicts of interest. Users and editors should be aware of these findings when using and appraising guidelines.© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.