Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 500

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Vitamin D Supplementation on Wintertime and Overall Bone Loss in Healthy Postmenopausal Women

Dawson-Hughes, Bess, Dallal, Gerard E., Krall, Elizabeth A., Harris, Susan, Sokoll, Lori J., Falconer, Gladys·1991·Annals of Internal Medicine
DOI 10.7326/0003-4819-115-7-505
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether relative vitamin D deficiency during the winter months contributes to age-related bone loss and whether rates of change in hard- and soft-tissue mass vary during the year. DESIGN: Double-blind, placebo-controlled, 1-year trial in 249 women in which equal numbers of women were randomized to either placebo or 400 IU of vitamin D daily. All women received 377 mg/d of supplemental calcium largely as calcium citrate malate. PATIENTS: Healthy, ambulatory postmenopausal women with usual intakes of vitamin D of 100 IU/d. MEASUREMENTS: Duplicate spine and whole-body scans were done by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry at 6-month intervals that were timed to periods when 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels were highest and lowest. Period 1 was June-July to December-January and period 2 was December-January to the next June-July. Serum parathyroid hormone and plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels were measured during periods 1 and 2. MAIN RESULTS: In the placebo group, spinal bone mineral density increased in period 1, decreased in period 2, and sustained no net change. Women treated with vitamin D had a similar spinal increase in period 1 (1.46% compared with 1.40% in placebo), less loss in period 2 (-0.54% compared with -1.22%, CI for the difference, 0.05% to 1.31%, P = 0.032) and a significant overall benefit (0.85% compared with 0.15%, CI for the difference, 0.03% to 1.37%, P = 0.04). In period 2, 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels were lower and parathyroid hormone levels were higher in the placebo than in the vitamin D group. Whole-body lean and fat tissue and bone mineral density varied during the year but did not change overall. CONCLUSIONS: At latitude 42 degrees, healthy postmenopausal women with vitamin D intakes of 100 IU daily can significantly reduce late wintertime bone loss and improve net bone density of the spine over one year by increasing their intake of vitamin D to 500 IU daily. A long-term benefit of preventing vitamin D insufficiency in the winter seems likely although it remains to be shown. Observed changes in bone as well as in fat and lean tissue appear to be related to season.

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 · 10.7326/0003-4819-115-7-505

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Dawson-Hughes, B., Dallal, G. E., Krall, E. A., Harris, S., Sokoll, L. J., & Falconer, G.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Publisher
American College of Physicians
Published
1991-10-01
Volume
115
Issue
7
Pages
505-512
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
DOI
10.7326/0003-4819-115-7-505
OpenAlex
W2065634792
Cited by
500
References
2
FWCI
13.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

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.