Revisiting Vitamin D Guidelines: A Critical Appraisal of the Literature.
AI interpretation is pending for this paper.
Open original publication →What the AI sees
Not AI summarized yet.
Research significance
Pending deeper interpretation.
Source abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The goal of this review is to compare the 2024 and 2011 Endocrine Society's Clinical Practice Guidelines on vitamin D2 or vitamin D3 (vitamin D). The 2024 Guideline made recommendations for the general healthy population for skeletal and extra skeletal health benefits of vitamin D. This contrasts with the 2011 Guidelines which provided clinicians with guidance on how to evaluate and treat patients with vitamin D deficiency and prevent recurrence. DISCUSSION: The 2024 Guideline focused on randomized controlled trials and ignored association studies and other studies that have supported the skeletal and extra skeletal health benefits of vitamin D. The 2024 Guideline recommended empiric vitamin D in children and adolescents aged 1 to 18 years to reduce risk of upper respiratory tract infections, pregnant women to improve pregnancy-related outcomes, prediabetic patients to reduce risk of diabetes, and to improve mortality in those over 75 years. CONCLUSION: These guidelines do not apply to individuals with abnormalities in calcium, phosphate, vitamin D, and bone metabolism which were provided in the 2011 Guidelines. For nonpregnant adults up to the age of 75, they recommend the Dietary Reference Intakes of 600 IUs (international units; 1 IU = 25 ng of vitamin D), and 800 IUs as recommended by The Institute of Medicine. Association studies have suggested that to obtain maximum extraskeletal benefits from vitamin D including reducing risk of upper respiratory tract infection for children and adults, autoimmune disorders, pre-eclampsia, low birth weight, neonatal dental caries, and deadly cancers circulating concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D should be at least 30 ng/mL with a preferred range of 40-60 ng/mL as recommended by the 2011 Guidelines.