Cited by 65

Vitamin D deficiency and its supplementation in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Karam, Chafic, Barrett, Matthew J., Imperato, Theresa, MacGowan, Daniel J.L., Scelsa, Stephen·2013·Journal of Clinical Neuroscience

Abstract

We studied 25-hydroxyvitamin D (vitamin D) levels in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and the effect of vitamin D supplementation. Vitamin D levels were checked in 37 consecutive patients with ALS. Demographic data, vitamin D supplementation, change in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS-R) score, and side effects from vitamin D were noted over a 9 month follow-up period. ALSFRS-R scores were compared between patients who took vitamin D and those who did not. The median age was 55 years and median time since symptom onset was 61 months. The mean vitamin D level was 22.3 ng/mL (normal range, 30-80 ng/mL). Eighty-one percent of patients had a vitamin D level lower than 30 ng/mL and 43% had a vitamin D level lower than 20 ng/mL. Twenty patients took 2000 international units of vitamin D daily. After adjustment for age and baseline vitamin D levels in a linear regression model, the ALSFRS-R score decline was smaller in patients taking vitamin D at 9 months (p=0.02) but was not significantly different at 3 or 6 months. Median vitamin D levels rose from 18.5 to 31.0 ng/mL at 6 months in the group taking vitamin D. No side effects secondary to vitamin D supplementation were reported. Vitamin D supplementation at 2000 international units daily was safe over a period of 9 months and may have a beneficial effect on ALSFRS-R scores. Further studies are warranted to determine whether there is a benefit in vitamin D supplementation for all ALS pa…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jocn.2013.01.011

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • It has been theorized that the deterioration in bone health may be due to increased bone turnover, exposure to environmental toxins such as lead, or vitamin D deficiency.

    “It has been theorized that the deterioration in bone health may be due to increased bone turnover, exposure to environmental toxins such as lead, or vitamin D deficiency [73,74,75,76].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Karam, C., Barrett, M. J., Imperato, T., MacGowan, D. J. L., & Scelsa, S.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-11
Volume
20
Issue
11
Pages
1550-1553
ISSN
0967-5868
Cited by
65
References
1
Language
en

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