vitamin D2/Finding
One finding, on its own
A single claim from the graph, with the evidence strength computed from its study, the sentence it was drawn from, and the paper. This address does not change.
No detected effect on C-reactive protein concentration
ModerateEvidence strength: moderate. Human evidence with one recorded weakness, or capped at moderate by its design or by unread numbers.FindingNull result“Among the secondary outcomes, there were no differences comparing D2 with placebo or D3 with placebo for anthropometric measures, blood pressure, hsCRP, CVD risk, assessed by UKPDS risk engine, hepatic markers, or fructosamine.”
Quoted verbatim from Effects of vitamin D2 or D3 supplementation on glycaemic control and cardiometabolic risk among people at risk of type 2 diabetes: results of a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial.. - Study
- RCT
- Duration
- 4 months
- Dose
- 100,000 IU ergocalciferol (vitamin D2) orally once monthly for 4 months
- Population
- Adults aged 30-75 at elevated risk of type 2 diabetes (non-diabetic hyperglycaemia or positive diabetes risk score), UK; vitamin D2 arm versus placebo arm
Effects of vitamin D2 or D3 supplementation on glycaemic control and cardiometabolic risk among people at risk of type 2 diabetes: results of a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial.2016PMID:26700109Industry fundedPermalink
Keep reading
- Everything the graph holds on vitamin D2
- Every compound studied against C-reactive protein concentration
- How to read the evidence strength and the marks
To cite this finding: https://catalystproject.ai/e/01M4PJNA0C0K1C8NRK8PRNQ6DN