Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 597

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Vitamin D status in the United States, 2011–2014

Open access
Herrick, Kirsten A, Storandt, Renee J, Afful, Joseph, Pfeiffer, Christine M, Schleicher, Rosemary L, Gahche, Jaime J, Potischman, Nancy·2019·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background: Vitamin D is important for bone health; in 2014 it was the fifth most commonly ordered laboratory test among Medicare Part B payments. Objectives: The aim of this study was to describe vitamin D status in the US population in 2011–2014 and trends from 2003 to 2014. Methods: We used serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D data from NHANES 2011–2014 (n = 16,180), and estimated the prevalence at risk of deficiency (<30 nmol/L) or prevalence at risk of inadequacy (30–49 nmol/L) by age, sex, race and Hispanic origin, and dietary intake of vitamin D. We also present trends between 2003 and 2014. Results: In 2011–2014, the percentage aged ≥1 y at risk of vitamin D deficiency or inadequacy was 5.0% (95% CI: 4.1%, 6.2%) and 18.3% (95% CI: 16.2%, 20.6%). The prevalence of at risk of deficiency was lowest among children aged 1–5 y (0.5%; 95% CI: 0.3%, 1.1%), peaked among adults aged 20–39 y (7.6%; 95% CI: 6.0%, 9.6%), and fell to 2.9% (95% CI: 2.0%, 4.0%) among adults aged ≥60 y; the prevalence of at risk of inadequacy was similar. The prevalence of at risk of deficiency was higher among non-Hispanic black (17.5%; 95% CI: 15.2%, 20.0%) than among non-Hispanic Asian (7.6%; 95% CI: 5.9%, 9.9%), non-Hispanic white (2.1%; 95% CI: 1.5%, 2.7%), and Hispanic (5.9%; 95% CI: 4.4%, 7.8%) persons; the prevalence of at risk of inadequacy was similar. Persons with higher vitamin D dietary intake or who used supplements had lower prevalences of at risk of deficiency or inadequacy. From 2003 to 2014 there was no change in the risk of vitamin D deficiency; the risk of inadequacy declined from 21.0% (95% CI: 17.9%, 24.5%) to 17.7% (95% CI: 16.0%, 19.7%). Conclusion: The prevalence of at risk of vitamin D deficiency in the United States remained stable from 2003 to 2014; at risk of inadequacy declined. Differences in vitamin D status by race and Hispanic origin warrant additional investigation.

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 · 10.1093/ajcn/nqz037

Cites

1 of 1 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

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?

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

Cited by

See all 597

Metadata

Authors
Herrick, K. A., Storandt, R. J., Afful, J., Pfeiffer, C. M., Schleicher, R. L., Gahche, J. J., & Potischman, N.
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-07
Volume
110
Issue
1
Pages
150-157
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2944533085
Cited by
597
References
1
FWCI
30.52
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 status in the United States, 2011–2014. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ajcn/nqz037
The paper
Herrick, K. A., Storandt, R. J., Afful, J., Pfeiffer, C. M., Schleicher, R. L., Gahche, J. J., & Potischman, N. (2019). Vitamin D status in the United States, 2011–2014. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqz037

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.