4.7 Article

Evaluation, Treatment, and Prevention of Vitamin D Deficiency: an Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Volume 96, Issue 7, Pages 1911-1930

Publisher

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2011-0385

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Merck
  2. Novartis
  3. Nichols-Quest Diagnostics
  4. Bayer
  5. Aventis
  6. Warner Chilcott
  7. Amgen
  8. UV Foundation
  9. Mushroom Council
  10. Dairy Management, Inc.
  11. American Society for Bone and Mineral Research
  12. American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, International Society for Clinical Densitometry
  13. National Osteoporosis Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The objective was to provide guidelines to clinicians for the evaluation, treatment, and prevention of vitamin D deficiency with an emphasis on the care of patients who are at risk for deficiency. Participants: The Task Force was composed of a Chair, six additional experts, and a methodologist. The Task Force received no corporate funding or remuneration. Consensus Process: Consensus was guided by systematic reviews of evidence and discussions during several conference calls and e-mail communications. The draft prepared by the Task Force was reviewed successively by The Endocrine Society's Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee, Clinical Affairs Core Committee, and cosponsoring associations, and it was posted on The Endocrine Society website for member review. At each stage of review, the Task Force received written comments and incorporated needed changes. Conclusions: Considering that vitamin D deficiency is very common in all age groups and that few foods contain vitamin D, the Task Force recommended supplementation at suggested daily intake and tolerable upper limit levels, depending on age and clinical circumstances. The Task Force also suggested the measurement of serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D level by a reliable assay as the initial diagnostic test in patients at risk for deficiency. Treatment with either vitamin D-2 or vitamin D-3 was recommended for deficient patients. At the present time, there is not sufficient evidence to recommend screening individuals who are not at risk for deficiency or to prescribe vitamin D to attain the noncalcemic benefit for cardiovascular protection. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 96: 1911-1930, 2011)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available