Review the Research<\/p>\n
Get summaries of key research on vitamin D and COVID-19<\/h5><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\nLack of association between vitamin D insufficiency and clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infection.<\/h1><\/div>Take Home Message<\/span><\/h2><\/div>In a cross-sectional retrospective study of 153 hospitalized patients in Iran, sufficient vitamin D levels (\u00b330 ng\/ml or 75 nmol\/l) were not found to be protective against adverse clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Chronic disorders in COVID-19 patients were found to have greater relevance than vitamin D levels in determining the adverse outcomes of the infection.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Results<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n- The mean vitamin D level of the patients was 27.19\u00b117 ng\/mL (70\u00b150.4 nmol\/l).<\/li>\n
- In total, 62.7% (n = 96) of the patients had a 25(OH) D level of < 30 ng\/mL (<75 nmol\/l) and 37.25% (n = 57) had a 25(OH) D level of > 30 ng\/mL (nmol\/l).<\/li>\n
- Approximately, 49% (n = 75) of the patients suffered from at least one underlying disease. The most common underlying illnesses were hypertension 26.8% (n = 44), diabetes 26.8% (n = 41), cardiovascular disease 19.6% (n = 30), dyslipidemia 6.5% (n = 10), hypothyroidism 5.9% (n = 9), asthma 5.9% (n = 9), malignancy 1.96% (n = 3) and chronic liver disease 1.3% (n = 2), respectively.<\/li>\n
- The average hospitalization stay of patients was 6.3\u00b112 days. Bilateral lung involvement was seen in 17.64% (n = 28) of patients. In total, 6.53% (n = 10) of patients were admitted to the ICU. Invasive mechanical ventilator was utilized for 1.96% (n = 3) of patients while 9.08% (n = 15) of patients were under non-invasive ventilation. Based on severity of disease, 41.7% (n = 72) of patients were categorized into the mild form of COVID-19 disease, while 41.2 (n = 63) and 11.8% (n = 18) experienced the moderate and severe \/ critical forms of COVID-19, respectively. Overall, 3.26% (n = 5) of patients died.<\/li>\n
- In univariate and multivariate analyses, vitamin D sufficiency was not associated with a statistically significant lower risk of adverse clinical outcomes of COVID-19 such as duration of hospitalization, lung involvement, ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive ventilation, severity of disease, or death.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
![](\"https:\/\/www.vitamindandme.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/crop64_Lack-of-association_iStock-1251459935-300x300.jpg\" "\\"crop64_Lack")
<\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>Who<\/span><\/h2><\/div>One hundred fifty-three COVID-19 patients (87 men, 56.9%; 66 women, 43.1%) >18 years in Iran and who had real-time reverse transcriptase-PCR confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection and laboratory documentation of 25(OH)D level at the time of hospitalization.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Things to Keep in Mind<\/span><\/h2><\/div>\n- The observational design of the study cannot substantiate causality between serum vitamin D levels and severity of COVID-19 disease.<\/li>\n
- Only patients who had documented vitamin D levels were included in the study.<\/li>\n
- The sample size was small and some confounding factors, such as smoking and socioeconomic status, that may impact COVID-19 severity were not recorded for most patients.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Author\u2019s Conclusions<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>“<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>Sufficient vitamin D levels (\u00b330 ng\/ml or 75 nmol\/l) were not found to be protective against adverse clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Chronic disorders in COVID-19 patients were found to have greater relevance than vitamin D levels in determining the adverse outcomes of the infection.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
“<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>Study Design<\/span><\/h2><\/div>\n- This cross-sectional retrospective study analyzed the vitamin D levels of COVID-19 patients > 18 years who were admitted to Razi Hospital (Mazandaran province in northern Iran) from February to March 2020. Overall, a cutoff of \u00b330 ng\/mL (75 nmol\/l) was used to define vitamin D sufficiency.<\/li>\n
- Definitions of COVID-19 severity were based on the World Health Organization COVID-19 clinical management guideline.<\/li>\n
- Data such as demographic information (age, sex, body mass index [BMI], and living area), medical history, comorbidities, and diagnostic data of the patients, including vitamin D levels and patient outcomes were extracted from medical files.<\/li>\n
- The following outcomes were measured: duration of hospitalization, lung involvement, ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilator use, severity of disease, and in-hospital mortality.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Reference<\/span><\/h2><\/div>Davoudi A, Najafi N, Aarabi M, Tayebi A, Nikaeen R, Izadyar H, Salar Z, Delavarian L, Vaseghi N, Daftarian Z, Ahangarkani F. Lack of association between vitamin D insufficiency and clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infection. BMC Infect Dis. 2021 May 18;21(1):450. doi: 10.1186\/s12879-021-06168-7. PMID: 34006228; PMCID: PMC8130780.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
Lack of association between vitamin D insufficiency and clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infection.<\/h1><\/div>Take Home Message<\/span><\/h2><\/div>In a cross-sectional retrospective study of 153 hospitalized patients in Iran, sufficient vitamin D levels (\u00b330 ng\/ml or 75 nmol\/l) were not found to be protective against adverse clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Chronic disorders in COVID-19 patients were found to have greater relevance than vitamin D levels in determining the adverse outcomes of the infection.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Results<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n- The mean vitamin D level of the patients was 27.19\u00b117 ng\/mL (70\u00b150.4 nmol\/l).<\/li>\n
- In total, 62.7% (n = 96) of the patients had a 25(OH) D level of < 30 ng\/mL (<75 nmol\/l) and 37.25% (n = 57) had a 25(OH) D level of > 30 ng\/mL (nmol\/l).<\/li>\n
- Approximately, 49% (n = 75) of the patients suffered from at least one underlying disease. The most common underlying illnesses were hypertension 26.8% (n = 44), diabetes 26.8% (n = 41), cardiovascular disease 19.6% (n = 30), dyslipidemia 6.5% (n = 10), hypothyroidism 5.9% (n = 9), asthma 5.9% (n = 9), malignancy 1.96% (n = 3) and chronic liver disease 1.3% (n = 2), respectively.<\/li>\n
- The average hospitalization stay of patients was 6.3\u00b112 days. Bilateral lung involvement was seen in 17.64% (n = 28) of patients. In total, 6.53% (n = 10) of patients were admitted to the ICU. Invasive mechanical ventilator was utilized for 1.96% (n = 3) of patients while 9.08% (n = 15) of patients were under non-invasive ventilation. Based on severity of disease, 41.7% (n = 72) of patients were categorized into the mild form of COVID-19 disease, while 41.2 (n = 63) and 11.8% (n = 18) experienced the moderate and severe \/ critical forms of COVID-19, respectively. Overall, 3.26% (n = 5) of patients died.<\/li>\n
- In univariate and multivariate analyses, vitamin D sufficiency was not associated with a statistically significant lower risk of adverse clinical outcomes of COVID-19 such as duration of hospitalization, lung involvement, ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive ventilation, severity of disease, or death.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Who<\/span><\/h2><\/div>One hundred fifty-three COVID-19 patients (87 men, 56.9%; 66 women, 43.1%) >18 years in Iran and who had real-time reverse transcriptase-PCR confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection and laboratory documentation of 25(OH)D level at the time of hospitalization.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Things to Keep in Mind<\/span><\/h2><\/div>\n- The observational design of the study cannot substantiate causality between serum vitamin D levels and severity of COVID-19 disease.<\/li>\n
- Only patients who had documented vitamin D levels were included in the study.<\/li>\n
- The sample size was small and some confounding factors, such as smoking and socioeconomic status, that may impact COVID-19 severity were not recorded for most patients.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Author\u2019s Conclusions<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>“<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>Sufficient vitamin D levels (\u00b330 ng\/ml or 75 nmol\/l) were not found to be protective against adverse clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Chronic disorders in COVID-19 patients were found to have greater relevance than vitamin D levels in determining the adverse outcomes of the infection.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
“<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>Study Design<\/span><\/h2><\/div>\n- This cross-sectional retrospective study analyzed the vitamin D levels of COVID-19 patients > 18 years who were admitted to Razi Hospital (Mazandaran province in northern Iran) from February to March 2020. Overall, a cutoff of \u00b330 ng\/mL (75 nmol\/l) was used to define vitamin D sufficiency.<\/li>\n
- Definitions of COVID-19 severity were based on the World Health Organization COVID-19 clinical management guideline.<\/li>\n
- Data such as demographic information (age, sex, body mass index [BMI], and living area), medical history, comorbidities, and diagnostic data of the patients, including vitamin D levels and patient outcomes were extracted from medical files.<\/li>\n
- The following outcomes were measured: duration of hospitalization, lung involvement, ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilator use, severity of disease, and in-hospital mortality.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Reference<\/span><\/h2><\/div>Davoudi A, Najafi N, Aarabi M, Tayebi A, Nikaeen R, Izadyar H, Salar Z, Delavarian L, Vaseghi N, Daftarian Z, Ahangarkani F. Lack of association between vitamin D insufficiency and clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infection. BMC Infect Dis. 2021 May 18;21(1):450. doi: 10.1186\/s12879-021-06168-7. PMID: 34006228; PMCID: PMC8130780.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
Take Home Message<\/span><\/h2><\/div>In a cross-sectional retrospective study of 153 hospitalized patients in Iran, sufficient vitamin D levels (\u00b330 ng\/ml or 75 nmol\/l) were not found to be protective against adverse clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Chronic disorders in COVID-19 patients were found to have greater relevance than vitamin D levels in determining the adverse outcomes of the infection.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Results<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n- The mean vitamin D level of the patients was 27.19\u00b117 ng\/mL (70\u00b150.4 nmol\/l).<\/li>\n
- In total, 62.7% (n = 96) of the patients had a 25(OH) D level of < 30 ng\/mL (<75 nmol\/l) and 37.25% (n = 57) had a 25(OH) D level of > 30 ng\/mL (nmol\/l).<\/li>\n
- Approximately, 49% (n = 75) of the patients suffered from at least one underlying disease. The most common underlying illnesses were hypertension 26.8% (n = 44), diabetes 26.8% (n = 41), cardiovascular disease 19.6% (n = 30), dyslipidemia 6.5% (n = 10), hypothyroidism 5.9% (n = 9), asthma 5.9% (n = 9), malignancy 1.96% (n = 3) and chronic liver disease 1.3% (n = 2), respectively.<\/li>\n
- The average hospitalization stay of patients was 6.3\u00b112 days. Bilateral lung involvement was seen in 17.64% (n = 28) of patients. In total, 6.53% (n = 10) of patients were admitted to the ICU. Invasive mechanical ventilator was utilized for 1.96% (n = 3) of patients while 9.08% (n = 15) of patients were under non-invasive ventilation. Based on severity of disease, 41.7% (n = 72) of patients were categorized into the mild form of COVID-19 disease, while 41.2 (n = 63) and 11.8% (n = 18) experienced the moderate and severe \/ critical forms of COVID-19, respectively. Overall, 3.26% (n = 5) of patients died.<\/li>\n
- In univariate and multivariate analyses, vitamin D sufficiency was not associated with a statistically significant lower risk of adverse clinical outcomes of COVID-19 such as duration of hospitalization, lung involvement, ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive ventilation, severity of disease, or death.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Who<\/span><\/h2><\/div>One hundred fifty-three COVID-19 patients (87 men, 56.9%; 66 women, 43.1%) >18 years in Iran and who had real-time reverse transcriptase-PCR confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection and laboratory documentation of 25(OH)D level at the time of hospitalization.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Things to Keep in Mind<\/span><\/h2><\/div>\n- The observational design of the study cannot substantiate causality between serum vitamin D levels and severity of COVID-19 disease.<\/li>\n
- Only patients who had documented vitamin D levels were included in the study.<\/li>\n
- The sample size was small and some confounding factors, such as smoking and socioeconomic status, that may impact COVID-19 severity were not recorded for most patients.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Author\u2019s Conclusions<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>“<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>Sufficient vitamin D levels (\u00b330 ng\/ml or 75 nmol\/l) were not found to be protective against adverse clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Chronic disorders in COVID-19 patients were found to have greater relevance than vitamin D levels in determining the adverse outcomes of the infection.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
“<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>Study Design<\/span><\/h2><\/div>\n- This cross-sectional retrospective study analyzed the vitamin D levels of COVID-19 patients > 18 years who were admitted to Razi Hospital (Mazandaran province in northern Iran) from February to March 2020. Overall, a cutoff of \u00b330 ng\/mL (75 nmol\/l) was used to define vitamin D sufficiency.<\/li>\n
- Definitions of COVID-19 severity were based on the World Health Organization COVID-19 clinical management guideline.<\/li>\n
- Data such as demographic information (age, sex, body mass index [BMI], and living area), medical history, comorbidities, and diagnostic data of the patients, including vitamin D levels and patient outcomes were extracted from medical files.<\/li>\n
- The following outcomes were measured: duration of hospitalization, lung involvement, ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilator use, severity of disease, and in-hospital mortality.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Reference<\/span><\/h2><\/div>Davoudi A, Najafi N, Aarabi M, Tayebi A, Nikaeen R, Izadyar H, Salar Z, Delavarian L, Vaseghi N, Daftarian Z, Ahangarkani F. Lack of association between vitamin D insufficiency and clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infection. BMC Infect Dis. 2021 May 18;21(1):450. doi: 10.1186\/s12879-021-06168-7. PMID: 34006228; PMCID: PMC8130780.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
In a cross-sectional retrospective study of 153 hospitalized patients in Iran, sufficient vitamin D levels (\u00b330 ng\/ml or 75 nmol\/l) were not found to be protective against adverse clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Chronic disorders in COVID-19 patients were found to have greater relevance than vitamin D levels in determining the adverse outcomes of the infection.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Results<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n- The mean vitamin D level of the patients was 27.19\u00b117 ng\/mL (70\u00b150.4 nmol\/l).<\/li>\n
- In total, 62.7% (n = 96) of the patients had a 25(OH) D level of < 30 ng\/mL (<75 nmol\/l) and 37.25% (n = 57) had a 25(OH) D level of > 30 ng\/mL (nmol\/l).<\/li>\n
- Approximately, 49% (n = 75) of the patients suffered from at least one underlying disease. The most common underlying illnesses were hypertension 26.8% (n = 44), diabetes 26.8% (n = 41), cardiovascular disease 19.6% (n = 30), dyslipidemia 6.5% (n = 10), hypothyroidism 5.9% (n = 9), asthma 5.9% (n = 9), malignancy 1.96% (n = 3) and chronic liver disease 1.3% (n = 2), respectively.<\/li>\n
- The average hospitalization stay of patients was 6.3\u00b112 days. Bilateral lung involvement was seen in 17.64% (n = 28) of patients. In total, 6.53% (n = 10) of patients were admitted to the ICU. Invasive mechanical ventilator was utilized for 1.96% (n = 3) of patients while 9.08% (n = 15) of patients were under non-invasive ventilation. Based on severity of disease, 41.7% (n = 72) of patients were categorized into the mild form of COVID-19 disease, while 41.2 (n = 63) and 11.8% (n = 18) experienced the moderate and severe \/ critical forms of COVID-19, respectively. Overall, 3.26% (n = 5) of patients died.<\/li>\n
- In univariate and multivariate analyses, vitamin D sufficiency was not associated with a statistically significant lower risk of adverse clinical outcomes of COVID-19 such as duration of hospitalization, lung involvement, ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive ventilation, severity of disease, or death.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Who<\/span><\/h2><\/div>One hundred fifty-three COVID-19 patients (87 men, 56.9%; 66 women, 43.1%) >18 years in Iran and who had real-time reverse transcriptase-PCR confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection and laboratory documentation of 25(OH)D level at the time of hospitalization.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Things to Keep in Mind<\/span><\/h2><\/div>\n- The observational design of the study cannot substantiate causality between serum vitamin D levels and severity of COVID-19 disease.<\/li>\n
- Only patients who had documented vitamin D levels were included in the study.<\/li>\n
- The sample size was small and some confounding factors, such as smoking and socioeconomic status, that may impact COVID-19 severity were not recorded for most patients.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Author\u2019s Conclusions<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>“<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>Sufficient vitamin D levels (\u00b330 ng\/ml or 75 nmol\/l) were not found to be protective against adverse clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Chronic disorders in COVID-19 patients were found to have greater relevance than vitamin D levels in determining the adverse outcomes of the infection.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
“<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>Study Design<\/span><\/h2><\/div>\n- This cross-sectional retrospective study analyzed the vitamin D levels of COVID-19 patients > 18 years who were admitted to Razi Hospital (Mazandaran province in northern Iran) from February to March 2020. Overall, a cutoff of \u00b330 ng\/mL (75 nmol\/l) was used to define vitamin D sufficiency.<\/li>\n
- Definitions of COVID-19 severity were based on the World Health Organization COVID-19 clinical management guideline.<\/li>\n
- Data such as demographic information (age, sex, body mass index [BMI], and living area), medical history, comorbidities, and diagnostic data of the patients, including vitamin D levels and patient outcomes were extracted from medical files.<\/li>\n
- The following outcomes were measured: duration of hospitalization, lung involvement, ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilator use, severity of disease, and in-hospital mortality.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Reference<\/span><\/h2><\/div>Davoudi A, Najafi N, Aarabi M, Tayebi A, Nikaeen R, Izadyar H, Salar Z, Delavarian L, Vaseghi N, Daftarian Z, Ahangarkani F. Lack of association between vitamin D insufficiency and clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infection. BMC Infect Dis. 2021 May 18;21(1):450. doi: 10.1186\/s12879-021-06168-7. PMID: 34006228; PMCID: PMC8130780.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
- \n
- The mean vitamin D level of the patients was 27.19\u00b117 ng\/mL (70\u00b150.4 nmol\/l).<\/li>\n
- In total, 62.7% (n = 96) of the patients had a 25(OH) D level of < 30 ng\/mL (<75 nmol\/l) and 37.25% (n = 57) had a 25(OH) D level of > 30 ng\/mL (nmol\/l).<\/li>\n
- Approximately, 49% (n = 75) of the patients suffered from at least one underlying disease. The most common underlying illnesses were hypertension 26.8% (n = 44), diabetes 26.8% (n = 41), cardiovascular disease 19.6% (n = 30), dyslipidemia 6.5% (n = 10), hypothyroidism 5.9% (n = 9), asthma 5.9% (n = 9), malignancy 1.96% (n = 3) and chronic liver disease 1.3% (n = 2), respectively.<\/li>\n
- The average hospitalization stay of patients was 6.3\u00b112 days. Bilateral lung involvement was seen in 17.64% (n = 28) of patients. In total, 6.53% (n = 10) of patients were admitted to the ICU. Invasive mechanical ventilator was utilized for 1.96% (n = 3) of patients while 9.08% (n = 15) of patients were under non-invasive ventilation. Based on severity of disease, 41.7% (n = 72) of patients were categorized into the mild form of COVID-19 disease, while 41.2 (n = 63) and 11.8% (n = 18) experienced the moderate and severe \/ critical forms of COVID-19, respectively. Overall, 3.26% (n = 5) of patients died.<\/li>\n
- In univariate and multivariate analyses, vitamin D sufficiency was not associated with a statistically significant lower risk of adverse clinical outcomes of COVID-19 such as duration of hospitalization, lung involvement, ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive ventilation, severity of disease, or death.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Who<\/span><\/h2><\/div>
One hundred fifty-three COVID-19 patients (87 men, 56.9%; 66 women, 43.1%) >18 years in Iran and who had real-time reverse transcriptase-PCR confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection and laboratory documentation of 25(OH)D level at the time of hospitalization.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Things to Keep in Mind<\/span><\/h2><\/div>
- \n
- The observational design of the study cannot substantiate causality between serum vitamin D levels and severity of COVID-19 disease.<\/li>\n
- Only patients who had documented vitamin D levels were included in the study.<\/li>\n
- The sample size was small and some confounding factors, such as smoking and socioeconomic status, that may impact COVID-19 severity were not recorded for most patients.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Author\u2019s Conclusions<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>
“<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Sufficient vitamin D levels (\u00b330 ng\/ml or 75 nmol\/l) were not found to be protective against adverse clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Chronic disorders in COVID-19 patients were found to have greater relevance than vitamin D levels in determining the adverse outcomes of the infection.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
“<\/span><\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Study Design<\/span><\/h2><\/div>
- \n
- This cross-sectional retrospective study analyzed the vitamin D levels of COVID-19 patients > 18 years who were admitted to Razi Hospital (Mazandaran province in northern Iran) from February to March 2020. Overall, a cutoff of \u00b330 ng\/mL (75 nmol\/l) was used to define vitamin D sufficiency.<\/li>\n
- Definitions of COVID-19 severity were based on the World Health Organization COVID-19 clinical management guideline.<\/li>\n
- Data such as demographic information (age, sex, body mass index [BMI], and living area), medical history, comorbidities, and diagnostic data of the patients, including vitamin D levels and patient outcomes were extracted from medical files.<\/li>\n
- The following outcomes were measured: duration of hospitalization, lung involvement, ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilator use, severity of disease, and in-hospital mortality.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Reference<\/span><\/h2><\/div>
Davoudi A, Najafi N, Aarabi M, Tayebi A, Nikaeen R, Izadyar H, Salar Z, Delavarian L, Vaseghi N, Daftarian Z, Ahangarkani F. Lack of association between vitamin D insufficiency and clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 infection. BMC Infect Dis. 2021 May 18;21(1):450. doi: 10.1186\/s12879-021-06168-7. PMID: 34006228; PMCID: PMC8130780.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>