↓ Skip to main content

Vitamin D supplementation in children with asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
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 supplementation in children with asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Research Notes, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13104-014-0961-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Munes M Fares, Lina H Alkhaled, Salman M Mroueh, Elie A Akl

Abstract

BackgroundEpidemiologic studies suggest an association between vitamin D deficiency and atopic diseases, including asthma. The objective of this study was to systematically review the benefits and harms of vitamin D supplementation in children with asthma.MethodsWe used standard Cochrane systematic review methodology. The search strategy included an electronic search in February 2013 of MEDLINE and EMBASE. Two reviewers completed in duplicate and independently study selection, data abstraction, and assessment of risk of bias. We pooled the results of trials using a random-effects model. We assessed the quality of evidence by outcome using the GRADE methodology.ResultsFour trials with a total of 149 children met eligibility criteria. The trials had major methodological limitations. Given the four studies reporting on asthma symptoms used different instruments to measure that outcome, we opted not to conduct a meta-analysis. Three of those studies reported improvement in asthma symptoms in the vitamin D supplemented group study, while the fourth reported no effect (very low quality evidence). For the lung function outcome, a meta-analysis of two trials assessing post treatment FEV-1 found a mean difference of 0.54 liters per second (95% CI -5.28; 4.19; low quality evidence). For the vitamin D level outcome, a meta-analysis of three trials found a mean difference of 6.56 ng/ml (95% CI -0.64; 13.77; very low quality evidence).ConclusionsThe available very low to low quality evidence does not confirm or rule out beneficial effects of vitamin D supplementation in children with asthma. Large-scale, well-designed and executed randomized controlled trials are needed to better understand the effectiveness and safety of vitamin D in children with asthma.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Greece 1 <1%
Unknown 103 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 20%
Student > Master 13 13%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Postgraduate 11 11%
Other 8 8%
Other 22 21%
Unknown 17 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 24 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 December 2015.
All research outputs
#6,889,446
of 22,785,242 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,087
of 4,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,831
of 352,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#12
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,785,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 352,352 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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 72% of its contemporaries.