↓ Skip to main content

Vitamin D for the management of asthma

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#12 of 10,751)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
75 news outlets
blogs
12 blogs
twitter
172 tweeters
facebook
45 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
106 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
235 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Vitamin D for the management of asthma
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011511.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adrian R Martineau, Christopher J Cates, Mitsuyoshi Urashima, Megan Jensen, Alex P Griffiths, Ulugbek Nurmatov, Aziz Sheikh, Chris J Griffiths

Abstract

Several clinical trials of vitamin D to prevent asthma exacerbation and improve asthma control have been conducted in children and adults, but a meta-analysis restricted to double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials of this intervention is lacking. To evaluate the efficacy of administration of vitamin D and its hydroxylated metabolites in reducing the risk of severe asthma exacerbations (defined as those requiring treatment with systemic corticosteroids) and improving asthma symptom control. We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trial Register and reference lists of articles. We contacted the authors of studies in order to identify additional trials. Date of last search: January 2016. Double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials of vitamin D in children and adults with asthma evaluating exacerbation risk or asthma symptom control or both. Two review authors independently applied study inclusion criteria, extracted the data, and assessed risk of bias. We obtained missing data from the authors where possible. We reported results with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We included seven trials involving a total of 435 children and two trials involving a total of 658 adults in the primary analysis. Of these, one trial involving 22 children and two trials involving 658 adults contributed to the analysis of the rate of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids. Duration of trials ranged from four to 12 months, and the majority of participants had mild to moderate asthma. Administration of vitamin D reduced the rate of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.88; 680 participants; 3 studies; high-quality evidence), and decreased the risk of having at least one exacerbation requiring an emergency department visit or hospitalisation or both (odds ratio (OR) 0.39, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.78; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome, 27; 963 participants; 7 studies; high-quality evidence). There was no effect of vitamin D on % predicted forced expiratory volume in one second (mean difference (MD) 0.48, 95% CI -0.93 to 1.89; 387 participants; 4 studies; high-quality evidence) or Asthma Control Test scores (MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.70 to 0.54; 713 participants; 3 studies; high-quality evidence). Administration of vitamin D did not influence the risk of serious adverse events (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.89; 879 participants; 5 studies; moderate-quality evidence). One trial comparing low-dose versus high-dose vitamin D reported two episodes of hypercalciuria, one in each study arm. No other study reported any adverse event potentially attributable to administration of vitamin D. No participant in any included trial suffered a fatal asthma exacerbation. We did not perform a subgroup analysis to determine whether the effect of vitamin D on risk of severe exacerbation was modified by baseline vitamin D status, due to unavailability of suitably disaggregated data. We assessed two trials as being at high risk of bias in at least one domain; neither trial contributed data to the analysis of the outcomes reported above. Meta-analysis of a modest number of trials in people with predominantly mild to moderate asthma suggests that vitamin D is likely to reduce both the risk of severe asthma exacerbation and healthcare use. It is as yet unclear whether these effects are confined to people with lower baseline vitamin D status; further research, including individual patient data meta-analysis of existing datasets, is needed to clarify this issue. Children and people with frequent severe asthma exacerbations were under-represented; additional primary trials are needed to establish whether vitamin D can reduce the risk of severe asthma exacerbation in these groups.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 172 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 235 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Unknown 231 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 46 20%
Student > Master 40 17%
Unspecified 36 15%
Researcher 26 11%
Other 19 8%
Other 68 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 113 48%
Unspecified 45 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 5%
Other 28 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 784. 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 26 August 2019.
All research outputs
#7,014
of 13,898,880 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#12
of 10,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#320
of 263,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2
of 180 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,898,880 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,751 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 263,668 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 180 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.