Critical thinking about three meta-analyses: can vitamin D alone or with calcium prevent fractures?

Ref ID 779
First Author H. Fan
Journal CURRENT MEDICAL RESEARCH & OPINION
Year Of Publishing 2020
URL https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03007995.2019.1687432
Keywords • Inference
• Orthopaedic
• Vitamins and supplements
• Non-Cochrane reviews
Problem(s) • Intervention not described / defined
• Ignores setting or context of included studies which limits review applicability
• Incorrect interpretation or statistical inference error from meta-analysis
Article Type Editorial
Article Subtype Discussion piece
First Author Country China
Aim A discussion piece highlighting concerns over the conduct of two of three systematic reviews on vitamin D supplementation on fracture prevention with opposing conclusions published in 2007, 2017 and 2018.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings The discussion piece highlights various concerns over the conduct of two of three systematic reviews on vitamin D supplementation on fracture prevention with opposing conclusions published between 2007 to 2018. Concerns include a failure to appropriately define target populations and interventions for included studies and failure to appropriately interpret the conditions under which the conclusions of the review were accurate.
Number of systematic reviews included 3
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 3
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description