4.4 Review

Effects of Vitamin D Supplementation on Cognitive Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal

NEUROPSYCHOLOGY REVIEW
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11065-023-09598-z

Keywords

Nutrients; Cognition; Biological flaw; Vitamin D deficiency; Randomized controlled trial

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effects of vitamin D supplementation on global cognitive function and specific cognitive domains. The results showed that vitamin D had a significant positive effect on global cognition but not on specific cognitive domains. The effect was stronger in vulnerable populations and those with baseline vitamin D deficiency.
Clinical studies examining the effects of vitamin D on cognition have reported inconsistent results. To date, no comprehensive study has examined this effect on the basis of sample characteristics or intervention model-related factors. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on global cognitive function and specific cognitive domains. This review was preregistered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021249908) and comprised 24 trials enrolling 7557 participants (mean age: 65.21 years; 78.54% women). The meta-analysis revealed that vitamin D significantly influenced global cognition (Hedges' g = 0.128, p = .008) but not specific cognitive domains. A subgroup analysis indicated that the effect size of vitamin D was stronger for vulnerable populations (Hedges' g = 0.414) and those with baseline vitamin D deficiency (Hedges' g = 0.480). On the basis of subgroup analyses in studies without biological flaws (Hedges' g = 0.549), we suggest that an intervention model should correct baseline vitamin D deficiency. Our results indicate that vitamin D supplementation has a small but significant positive effect on cognition in adults.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available