Structured Abstract

Contents

• 1. INTRODUCTION
  • Purpose of Review
  • Condition Definition
  • Prevalence and Burden of Disease
  • Etiology and Natural History
  • Risk Factors
  • Rationale for Screening and Screening Strategies
  • Interventions and Treatment
  • Current Clinical Practice
  • Recommendations of Other Groups
• 2. METHODS
  • Key Questions and Analytic Framework
  • Search Strategies
  • Study Selection
  • Data Abstraction and Quality Rating
  • Data Synthesis
  • External Review
  • Response to Public Comments
• 3. RESULTS
  • Key Question 1 Is There Direct Evidence That Screening for Vitamin D Deficiency Results in Improved Health Outcomes?
  • Key Question 2 What Are the Harms of Screening?
  • Key Question 3 Does Treatment of Vitamin D Deficiency With Vitamin D Lead to Improved Health Outcomes?
  • Key Question 4 What Are the Adverse Effects of Treatment of Vitamin D Deficiency With Vitamin D?
• 4. DISCUSSION
  • Summary of Review Findings
  • Limitations of Review Methods
  • Limitations in the Evidence
  • Emerging Issues and Next Steps
  • Relevance for Priority Populations
  • Future Research
  • Conclusions
• REFERENCES
• Appendix A Contextual Questions
• Appendix B Detailed Methods
• Appendix C Evidence and Quality Tables

Acknowledgments: The authors acknowledge Andrew Hamilton, MLS, MS, for conducting literature searches; Rongwei Fu, PhD, for statistical assistance; and Spencer Dandy, BS, for assistance with drafting this report. The authors also thank AHRQ Medical Officers Robert McNellis, MPH, PA, Tina Fan, MD, MPH, and Tess Miller, DrPH, as well as current and former members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force who contributed to topic deliberations.

Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services¹, Contract No. HHSA-290-2007-10057-I, Task Order No. 13. Prepared by: Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center²

Suggested citation:

LeBlanc E, Chou R, Zakher B, Daeges M, Pappas M. Screening for Vitamin D Deficiency: Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation. Evidence Synthesis No. 119. AHRQ Publication No. 13-05183-EF-1. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014.

This report is based on research conducted by the Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. HHSA-290-2007-10057-I, Task Order Number 13). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents, and do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. No statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The information in this report is intended to help health care decisionmakers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information (i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients).

This report may be used, in whole or in part, as the basis for development of clinical practice guidelines and other quality enhancement tools, or as a basis for reimbursement and coverage policies. AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of such derivative products may not be stated or implied.

None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.

1

540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850; www​.ahrq.gov

2

Oregon Health & Science University, Mail Code: BICC, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239; www​.ohsu.edu/epc