| Title |
Vitamin D, Calcium, and Cardiovascular Disease: A“D”vantageous or “D”etrimental? An Era of Uncertainty
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Atherosclerosis Reports, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11883-017-0637-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kathleen Chin, Lawrence J. Appel, Erin D. Michos |
| Abstract |
While the function of vitamin D in regulating calcium homeostasis is well established, there has been growing interest in its role in the prevention of numerous chronic diseases, including cardiovascular disease (CVD). There is mounting epidemiological evidence suggesting that vitamin D deficiency is linked to increased CVD risk. However, the results of previous vitamin D supplementation trials have yielded mixed results in regards to cardiovascular health, and the results of ongoing large-scale randomized controlled trials are not yet available. Further complicating the issue, calcium supplementation, which is often prescribed concurrently with vitamin D, has been associated with increased CVD risk in some (but not all) studies. Thus, it is currently unclear whether vitamin D supplements, particularly for those that are deficient, can help prevent the development of CVD. In addition, there has not been uniform consensus regarding the threshold of 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels that constitutes "sufficiency" across organizational guidelines. This review will provide an update on the most recent evidence regarding the effects of vitamin D and calcium supplements on CVD clinical outcomes, summarize ongoing vitamin D trials, and discuss the current but remarkably disparate recommendations regarding vitamin D deficiency screening and supplementation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 39% |
| Finland | 2 | 11% |
| Mexico | 1 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 67% |
| Scientists | 3 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 65 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 23 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 24 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 March 2021.
All research outputs
#1,920,533
of 25,658,139 outputs
Outputs from Current Atherosclerosis Reports
#107
of 868 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,888
of 424,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Atherosclerosis Reports
#4
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,658,139 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 868 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,394 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.