Tier 1 — highest

Comparison of vitamin D2 and vitamin D3 supplementation in raising serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D status: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Laura Tripkovic, Helen Lambert, Kathryn Hart, Colin P Smith, Giselda Bucca, Simon Penson, Gemma Chope, Elina Hyppönen, Jacqueline Berry, Reinhold Vieth, Susan Lanham-New
The American journal of clinical nutrition 2012 95(6):1357-64

Bibliography

PubMed
PMID 22552031
PubMed Central
PMC3349454
Funding
Support is recorded from Medical Research Council, Department of Health, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council. See the original publication for grant and material-support details.
Competing interests
A competing-interest declaration is not available in the indexed abstract or accessible disclosure metadata.

Study snapshot

DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis
ModelHuman evidence synthesis
SampleRandomized trials directly comparing D2 and D3; search through July 2011
InterventionVitamin D2 versus D3 with differing administration schedules
DurationVaried across trials
EndpointsSerum total 25(OH)D

What the study showed, in plain terms

This publication examines serum total 25(oh)d. Study population or evidence base: Randomized trials directly comparing D2 and D3; search through July 2011. Intervention or exposure: Vitamin D2 versus D3 with differing administration schedules.

Key findings

D3 raised vitamin D status more effectively overall. The difference was clearer with bolus dosing than in the daily-dosing subgroup of this early review.

What this study can and cannot tell us

A biochemical comparison using a relatively early evidence base. It does not establish superiority for clinical disease outcomes.

Citation network

Articles citing this research paper

1 article

Biohack Blueprint analyses that reference this study in their evidence base.

Editorial review

Reviewed by the Biohack Blueprint research team

Last verified

Biohack Blueprint Research