CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 155Vitamin C and Antioxidants ResearchRespiratory viral infections researchHerbal Medicine Research Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of ascorbic acid on the common cold

Chalmers, Thomas C.·1975·The American Journal of Medicine
DOI 10.1016/0002-9343(75)90127-8
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Of 14 clinical trials of ascorbic acid in the prevention and treatment of the common cold, the data from 8 were considered well enough gathered to be creditable and to warrant combining for an over-all assessment of efficacy. Differences in mean prorated numbers of colds per year and durations of illness were 0.09 plus or minus 0.06 (plus or minus 1 standard error) and 0.11 plus or minus 0.24, respectively, favoring ascorbic acid over the placebo. These are minor and insignificant differences, but in most studies the severity of symptoms was significantly worse in the patients who received the placebo. In one study lasting 9 months, a large number of the volunteers tasted their capsules and correctly guessed what group they were in. All differences in severity and duration were eliminated by analyzing only the data from those who did not know which drug they were taking. Since there are no data on the long-term toxicity of ascorbic acid when given in doses of 1 g or more per day, it is concluded that the minor benefits of questionable validity are not worth the potential risk, no matter how small that might be.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0002-9343(75)90127-8

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

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

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Ritzel, 1961, Kritische Beurteilung des Vitamins C als Prophylacticum and Therapeuticum des Erkaltungskrankenheiten, Helv Med Acta, 28, 63
  2. 1970, Diabetes, 19, 1
  3. Anderson, 1973, Letter to the editor, Br Med J, 2, 354

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 155

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Chalmers, T. C.
Corresponding author
Chalmers, Thomas C.
Venue
The American Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1975-04
Volume
58
Issue
4
Pages
532-536
ISSN
0002-9343 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/0002-9343(75)90127-8
OpenAlex
W2047174982
Cited by
155
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • The American Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Vitamin C and Antioxidants Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Respiratory viral infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Herbal Medicine Research Studies
Keywords
vitamin C, common cold, cold prevention, cold treatment, symptom severity, disease duration, placebo comparison, chronic toxicity, vitamin C supplementation
MeSH terms
Ascorbic Acid, Clinical Trials as Topic, Common Cold, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Humans, Placebos, Time Factors

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