Digestery
Everyday supplements › Vitamin D and Infections › Studies

Blood level study

Study of 125 hospitalized babies with RSV: low vitamin D linked to life-threatening illness

Ferolla and colleagues · The Journal of infectious diseases · 2022

Original title: Serum Vitamin D Levels and Life-Threatening Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection in Previously Healthy Infants.

Under review. A person has not yet checked this summary against the paper. It is written from the PubMed abstract. Until a person checks it, search engines are asked not to list this page.

What the study found

Points to benefit

Twenty-two of 125 infants had life-threatening disease. Their median vitamin D was 18.4 ng/mL vs 31.7 ng/mL (P < .001). Vitamin D deficiency was a risk factor (odds ratio, 11.83; 95% CI, 3.89-35.9).

The study at a glance

Type of study
Blood level study
Who or what was studied
125 people · Previously healthy babies under 12 months in hospital with their first RSV infection
What was tested
Vitamin D blood level on admission vs needing intensive care and a breathing machine
What it measured
Other health or performance measures
Who has a stake
No stake declared
No reported conflicts of interest.
Journal
The Journal of infectious diseases, 2022
Source
PubMed record 35106574. This page is based on the abstract only.

How much this study counts

  • –Links blood levels to health. A blood level can be a sign of illness rather than a cause.
  • •125 people.
  • •Measured other health measures, not colds, flu and other respiratory infections itself.
  • ✓No competing interests declared.
  • •Summarized from the PubMed abstract only. The full paper may hold details the abstract leaves out.

✓ Strength– Limit• Note

These points come from fixed rules about the type of study, its size and length, what it measured, and who has a stake. Every study on Digestery gets the same rules.

Where this study sits

Each dot is one on-topic paper on this question. Steps near the top answer the question more directly.

↑ Stronger evidence

  1. Trials in people: colds, flu and chest infections

    10

    2 benefit, 8 no difference

  2. Trials in people: other measures

    5

    1 benefit, 1 mixed, 2 no difference, 1 harm

  3. Trials in people: lab tests or safety

    1

    1 no difference

  4. Population studies

    1

    1 no difference

  5. Blood levels and genes

    4

    3 benefit, 1 no difference

    ↑ This study is the ringed dot

↓ Weaker evidence

  • Points to benefit
  • Mixed
  • No difference
  • No direction
  • Points to harm

How it fits with the other research

The short answer to “Does vitamin D prevent colds and infections?”

Not clearly; any effect looks small.

Confidence: low. Based on 33 on-topic papers.

Read the full answer

Of the other 3 papers on the same step: 2 benefit, 1 no difference. This one found benefit. It agrees with most of them.

Other papers on the same step

See all 33 studies on this question

How this page was made

Label

First read of the abstract
Claude Sonnet
Independent second read
Claude Haiku
Differences settled
The reviewer corrected 3 fields after reading the abstract. Claude Opus 5.5.
Headline
Claude Sonnet, from the checked study record. A script checked its numbers and wording.
Numbers
Checked against the abstract by a script
“How much this study counts”
Fixed rules, the same for every study
Source check by a person
Not yet. Required before search engines may list this page.

Spot an error? Email a flag with a link to your source, or use the form on the question page.