Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Consensus statement from 2nd International Conference on Controversies in Vitamin D

Open access
Giustina, A., Adler, R. A., Binkley, N., Bollerslev, J., Bouillon, R., Dawson-Hughes, B., Ebeling, P. R., Feldman, D., Formenti, A. M., Lazaretti-Castro, M., Marcocci, C., Rizzoli, R., Sempos, C. T., Bilezikian, J. P.·2020·Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders

Abstract

The 2 nd International Conference on Controversies in Vitamin D was held in Monteriggioni (Siena), Italy, September 11-14, 2018. The aim of this meeting was to address ongoing controversies and timely topics in vitamin D research, to review available data related to these topics and controversies, to promote discussion to help resolve lingering issues and ultimately to suggest a research agenda to clarify areas of uncertainty. Several issues from the first conference, held in 2017, were revisited, such as assays used to determine serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentration, which remains a critical and controversial issue for defining vitamin D status. Definitions of vitamin D nutritional status (i.e. sufficiency, insufficiency and deficiency) were also revisited. New areas were reviewed, including vitamin D threshold values and how they should be defined in the context of specific diseases, sources of vitamin D and risk factors associated with vitamin D deficiency. Non-skeletal aspects related to vitamin D were also discussed, including the reproductive system, neurology, chronic kidney disease and falls. The therapeutic role of vitamin D and findings from recent clinical trials were also addressed. The topics were considered by 3 focus groups and divided into three main areas: 1) “Laboratory”: assays and threshold values to define vitamin D status; 2) “Clinical”: sources of vitamin D and risk factors and role of vitamin D in non-skeletal disease and 3) “Therapeutics”: controversial issues on observational studies and recent randomized controlled trials. In this report, we present a summary of our findings.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11154-019-09532-w

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 13 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Giustina, A., Adler, R. A., Binkley, N., Bollerslev, J., Bouillon, R., Dawson-Hughes, B., Ebeling, P. R., Feldman, D., Formenti, A. M., Lazaretti-Castro, M., Marcocci, C., Rizzoli, R., Sempos, C. T., & Bilezikian, J. P.
Venue
Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
Published
2020-03
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
89-116
ISSN
  • 1389-9155 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2606
OpenAlex
W3011325973
Cited by
257
References
13
FWCI
27.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.