First, some introductory information regarding the primary source of evidence, Archives of Internal Medicine -- a publication of The American Medical Association -- this information is from Wikipedia -- it was accurate as of September 10, 2007:
Archives of Internal Medicine
The Archives of Internal Medicine is a bi-monthly international peer-reviewed professional medical journal published by the American Medical Association. Archives of Internal Medicine, begun in 1908, publishes original, peer-reviewed manuscripts on a full spectrum of internal medicine topics including cardiovascular disease, geriatrics, infectious disease, gastroenterology, endocrinology, allergy, and immunology.
The Archives of Internal Medicine, which publishes 22 times per year, has a a print circulation of over 100 000 physicians in 75 countries. The Archives of Internal Medicine's recent acceptance rate is about 10%. The average time from receipt to first decision is 12 days; from receipt to final decision, 14 days; from submission to publication, 152 days. The Editor of the Archives of Internal Medicine is Philip Greenland, MD, Executive Associate Dean, Clinical and Translational Research, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (see Archives Editorial Board).
The journal's impact factor was 8.0 in 2005, ranking near the top among over 100 general and internal medicine titles.
Here's the study abstract -- this is a meta analysis -- definition of meta analysis:
The process or technique of synthesizing research results by using various statistical methods to retrieve, select, and combine results from previous separate but related studies.
Vol. 167 No. 16, September 10, 2007
Review Article
Vitamin D Supplementation and Total Mortality
A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Philippe Autier, MD; Sara Gandini, PhD
Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:1730-1737.
Background Ecological and observational studies suggest that low vitamin D status could be associated with higher mortality from life-threatening conditions including cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes mellitus that account for 60% to 70% of total mortality in high-income countries. We examined the risk of dying from any cause in subjects who participated in randomized trials testing the impact of vitamin D supplementation (ergocalciferol [vitamin D2] or cholecalciferol [vitamin D3]) on any health condition.
Methods The literature up to November 2006 was searched without language restriction using the following databases: PubMed, ISI Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library.
Results We identified 18 independent randomized controlled trials, including 57 311 participants. A total of 4777 deaths from any cause occurred during a trial size–adjusted mean of 5.7 years. Daily doses of vitamin D supplements varied from 300 to 2000 IU. The trial size–adjusted mean daily vitamin D dose was 528 IU. In 9 trials, there was a 1.4- to 5.2-fold difference in serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D between the intervention and control groups. The summary relative risk for mortality from any cause was 0.93 (95% confidence interval, 0.87-0.99). There was neither indication for heterogeneity nor indication for publication biases. The summary relative risk did not change according to the addition of calcium supplements in the intervention.
Conclusions Intake of ordinary doses of vitamin D supplements seems to be associated with decreases in total mortality rates. The relationship between baseline vitamin D status, dose of vitamin D supplements, and total mortality rates remains to be investigated. Population-based, placebo-controlled randomized trials with total mortality as the main end point should be organized for confirming these findings.
Author Affiliations: International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France (Dr Autier); and the European Institute of Oncology, Milano, Italy (Dr Gandini).
An editorial on this publication was also published; but only the extract is available online:
Vol. 167 No. 16, September 10, 2007
Editorial
Can Vitamin D Reduce Total Mortality?
Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:1709-1710.
The antirachitic properties of vitamin D, the "sunshine vitamin," are generally well recognized, and the role of vitamin D in calcium and phosphorus homeostasis is well established.1 In the last several decades, many studies have documented nontraditional roles of vitamin D, as well as adverse consequences of vitamin D deficiency for a range of conditions, including bone health, cancer, cardiovascular disease, glucose intolerance, high blood pressure, some infectious diseases, multiple sclerosis, and type 2 diabetes mellitus.2 Except for effects on bone health, which are established in randomized clinical trials,3 the evidence for most of the other potential benefits is generally considered to be less definitive. Nevertheless, an impressive body of in vitro, animal, clinical, and epidemiologic evidence supports the evidence.
An article in this issue of the Archives adds a new chapter in the accumulating evidence for a beneficial role of vitamin D on health.4 From the literature, Autier and . . . [Full Text of this Article]
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Edward Giovannucci, MD, ScD
Another related topic of interest may be: Vitamin D deficiency and overdose in NEJM.
It seems Vitamin D may soon gain formal acceptance in the medical community as a "must take" supplement for the general population. It seems first: "Population-based, placebo-controlled randomized trials with total mortality as the main end point should be organized for confirming these findings."
Take care.
