Intratrial exposure to vitamin D and new-onset diabetes among adults with prediabetes: a secondary analysis from the Vitamin D and Type 2 Diabetes (D2d) study
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: Postrandomization biases may influence the estimate of efficacy of supplemental vitamin D in diabetes prevention trials. In the Vitamin D and Type 2 Diabetes (D2d) study, repeated measures of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] level provided an opportunity to test whether intratrial vitamin D exposure affected diabetes risk and whether the effect was modified by trial assignment (vitamin D vs. placebo). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: versus placebo on new-onset diabetes in adults with prediabetes. Intratrial vitamin D exposure was calculated as the cumulative rolling mean of annual serum 25(OH)D measurements. Hazard ratios for diabetes among participants who had intratrial 25(OH)D levels of <50, 75-99, 100-124, and ≥125 nmol/L were compared with those with levels of 50-74 nmol/L (the range considered adequate by the National Academy of Medicine) in the entire cohort and by trial assignment. RESULTS: = 0.018). The hazard ratio for diabetes for an increase of 25 nmol/L in intratrial 25(OH)D level was 0.75 (95% CI 0.68-0.82) among those assigned to vitamin D and 0.90 (0.80-1.02) among those assigned to placebo. The hazard ratios for diabetes among participants treated with vitamin D who maintained intratrial 25(OH)D levels of 100-124 and ≥125 nmol/L were 0.48 (0.29-0.80) and 0.29 (0.17-0.50), respectively, compared with those who maintained a level of 50-74 nmol/L. CONCLUSIONS: Daily vitamin D supplementation to maintain a serum 25(OH)D level ≥100 nmol/L is a promising approach to reducing the risk of diabetes in adults with prediabetes.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
Post hoc analyses and meta-analyses suggest a potential benefit of vitamin D supplementation in specific populations.
“Although the Vitamin D and Type 2 Diabetes Study (D2d) prospective RCT showed no significant benefit of vitamin D versus placebo on the progression to type 2 diabetes in individuals at high risk (223), post hoc analyses and metaanalyses suggest a potential benefit in specific populations (223)(224)(225)(226).”
From 5. Facilitating Positive Health Behaviors and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes:<i>Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023</i> (2023) · cites this paper as [224]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 23 · Cited by 192
- Authors
- Dawson-Hughes, B., Staten, M. A., Knowler, W. C., Nelson, J., Vickery, E. M., LeBlanc, E. S., Neff, L. M., Park, J., & Pittas, A. G.
- Affiliations
- Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts University, Boston, MA
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (US)
- Tufts Medical Center (US)
- Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- MedStar Health Research Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Pittas, Anastassios G.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Diabetes Care
- Publisher
- American Diabetes Association
- Published
- 2020-10-05
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2916-2922
- ISSN
- 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-5548
- PMC
- PMC7770274
- OpenAlex
- W3090780683
- Cited by
- 192
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 6
- FWCI
- 19.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U01-DK-098245)
- American Diabetes Association (1-14-D2d-01)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Vitamin D Research Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
- Keywords
- vitamin D supplementation, prediabetes, type 2 diabetes prevention, 25-hydroxyvitamin D, new-onset diabetes
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Humans, Prediabetic State, Vitamin D, Vitamins
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