↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Vitamin D supplementation for preventing infections in children under five years of age

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
47 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
383 Mendeley
Title
Vitamin D supplementation for preventing infections in children under five years of age
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008824.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohammad Y Yakoob, Rehana A Salam, Farhan R Khan, Zulfiqar A Bhutta

Abstract

Vitamin D is a micronutrient important for bone growth and immune function. Deficiency can lead to rickets and has been linked to various infections, including respiratory infections. The evidence on the effects of supplementation on infections in children has not been assessed systematically. To evaluate the role of vitamin D supplementation in preventing pneumonia, tuberculosis (TB), diarrhoea, and malaria in children under five years of age. This includes high-, middle-, and low-income countries. We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) , ClinicalTrials.gov and the ISRCTN registry (http://www.isrctn.com/) up to 16 June 2016. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated preventive supplementation of vitamin D (versus placebo or no intervention) in children under five years of age. Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias of included trials. Four trials met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 3198 children under five years of age, and were conducted in Afghanistan, Spain, and the USA. Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency varied widely in these populations (range: 73.1% in Afghanistan, 10 to 12% in USA, and 6.2% in Spain). The included trials evaluated mortality (two trials), pneumonia incidence (two trials), diarrhoea incidence (two trials), hospitalization (two trials), and mean serum vitamin D concentrations (four trials).We do not know whether vitamin D supplementation impacts on all-cause mortality because this outcome was underpowered due to few events (risk ratio (RR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 3.74; one trial, 3046 participants, low quality evidence).For pneumonia, episodes of 'radiologically confirmed' first or only episode of pneumonia were little different in the supplemented and unsupplemented group (Rate Ratio: 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.26; two trials, 3134 participants, moderate quality evidence), and similarly for children with confirmed or unconfirmed pneumonia (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.04; one trial, 3046 participants). In these two trials there were no obvious differences between supplemented and unsupplemented children regarding episodes of diarrhoea.In the single large trial from Afghanistan, the trial authors reported that vitamin D supplementation was associated with an increase in repeat episodes of pneumonia confirmed by chest radiograph (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.21; one trial, 3046 participants), but not reflected in the outcome of confirmed or unconfirmed pneumonia (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.13; one trial, 3046 participants).For hospital admission measured in one small trial, there was no difference detected (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.62; one trial, 88 participants; very low quality evidence).The mean serum vitamin D concentrations were higher in supplemented compared to unsupplemented children at the end of supplementation (MD 7.72 ng/mL, 95% CI 0.50 to 14.93; four trials, 266 participants, low quality evidence). These results were driven primarily by two smaller trials with large magnitudes of effect. In the other two bigger trials, serum vitamin D concentrations were elevated in the intervention group for most of the trial duration but not at the end of supplementation. This may be due to time elapsed at measurement from the last dose, incomplete compliance, or increased need of vitamin D with infant age.We did not find any trial that reported on the incidence of TB, malaria or febrile illness, duration of pneumonia, duration of diarrhoea, severity of infection, and cause-specific mortality (due to TB, diarrhoea, or malaria). Evidence from one large trial did not demonstrate benefit of vitamin D supplementation on the incidence of pneumonia or diarrhoea in children under five years. To our knowledge, trials that evaluated supplementation for preventing other infections, including TB and malaria, have not been performed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 47 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 383 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 383 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 69 18%
Student > Bachelor 57 15%
Researcher 51 13%
Other 29 8%
Student > Postgraduate 26 7%
Other 80 21%
Unknown 71 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 144 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 54 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 4%
Social Sciences 13 3%
Other 55 14%
Unknown 85 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 54. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 November 2020.
All research outputs
#490,071
of 17,697,618 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,131
of 11,734 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,406
of 301,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#22
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,697,618 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,734 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,106 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.