Digestery
Everyday supplements › Vitamin D and Infections › Studies

Population study: one-time survey

In 49 adults with bowel disease, vitamin D use showed no clear COVID-19 link

Straume and colleagues · Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024

Original title: Exploring the Impact of COVID-19 on Ulcerative Colitis Patients: A Lifestyle Perspective.

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

No difference

Among COVID-19 positive patients, 11 (79%) did not use vitamin D vs 3 (21%) who did (OR: 0.38 (0.07; 1.51), p = 0.28). No significant differences for supplements, vitamins or lifestyle.

The study at a glance

Type of study
Population study: one-time survey
Who or what was studied
49 people · Adults with ulcerative colitis (bowel disease) at one hospital in Latvia
What was tested
Vitamin D use, diet and habits compared between those who had COVID-19 and those who did not
What it measured
The question itself: colds, flu and other respiratory infections
Who has a stake
No stake declared
No conflicts of interest declared.
Journal
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2024
Source
PubMed record 38276061. This page is based on the abstract only.

How much this study counts

  • –A one-time snapshot: it shows a link, not a cause, and cannot show which came first.
  • •49 people.
  • ✓Measured the question itself: colds, flu and other respiratory infections.
  • ✓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

    ↑ This study is the ringed dot

  5. Blood levels and genes

    4

    3 benefit, 1 no difference

↓ 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

Few other papers sit on the same step, so there is little to compare it with.

  • Counted on the ladder, but not quoted in the page’s main findings.

Other papers on the same step

None among the papers we read.

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 two reads agreed on every checked field. 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.