Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,424

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Vitamin D deficiency 2.0: an update on the current status worldwide

Open access
Amrein, Karin, Scherkl, Mario, Hoffmann, Magdalena, Neuwersch-Sommeregger, Stefan, Köstenberger, Markus, Tmava Berisha, Adelina, Martucci, Gennaro, Pilz, Stefan, Malle, Oliver·2020·European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Vitamin D testing and the use of vitamin D supplements have increased substantially in recent years. Currently, the role of vitamin D supplementation, and the optimal vitamin D dose and status, is a subject of debate, because large interventional studies have been unable to show a clear benefit (in mostly vitamin D replete populations). This may be attributed to limitations in trial design, as most studies did not meet the basic requirements of a nutrient intervention study, including vitamin D-replete populations, too small sample sizes, and inconsistent intervention methods regarding dose and metabolites. Vitamin D deficiency (serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] < 50 nmol/L or 20 ng/ml) is associated with unfavorable skeletal outcomes, including fractures and bone loss. A 25(OH)D level of >50 nmol/L or 20 ng/ml is, therefore, the primary treatment goal, although some data suggest a benefit for a higher threshold. Severe vitamin D deficiency with a 25(OH)D concentration below <30 nmol/L (or 12 ng/ml) dramatically increases the risk of excess mortality, infections, and many other diseases, and should be avoided whenever possible. The data on a benefit for mortality and prevention of infections, at least in severely deficient individuals, appear convincing. Vitamin D is clearly not a panacea, and is most likely efficient only in deficiency. Given its rare side effects and its relatively wide safety margin, it may be an important, inexpensive, and safe adjuvant therapy for many diseases, but future large and well-designed studies should evaluate this further. A worldwide public health intervention that includes vitamin D supplementation in certain risk groups, and systematic vitamin D food fortification to avoid severe vitamin D deficiency, would appear to be important. In this narrative review, the current international literature on vitamin D deficiency, its relevance, and therapeutic options is discussed.

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 · 10.1038/s41430-020-0558-y

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Cited by

See all 1,424

Metadata

Authors
Amrein, K., Scherkl, M., Hoffmann, M., Neuwersch-Sommeregger, S., Köstenberger, M., Tmava Berisha, A., Martucci, G., Pilz, S., & Malle, O.
Venue
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Published
2020-01-20
Volume
74
Issue
11
Pages
1498-1513
ISSN
  • 0954-3007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5640
OpenAlex
W2999622127
Cited by
1,424
References
5
FWCI
110.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Vitamin D deficiency 2.0: an update on the current status worldwide. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41430-020-0558-y
The paper
Amrein, K., Scherkl, M., Hoffmann, M., Neuwersch-Sommeregger, S., Köstenberger, M., Tmava Berisha, A., Martucci, G., Pilz, S., & Malle, O. (2020). Vitamin D deficiency 2.0: an update on the current status worldwide. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-020-0558-y

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.