Only 58 of 276 hazard-ratio estimates from vitamin D randomized trials are statistically significant

Asked:

Find me all RCTs for vitamin D. In the table, report study name, paper name, outcome measure, HR, CI,

Follow-up:

In the table, can you show statistically signicant results on top (CI not covering 1.0). Show non-signifant in gray background

A broad live-web systematic search (2026-09-04) for randomized vitamin D supplementation trials reporting at least one hazard ratio with a confidence interval found 276 estimate rows across 20 extracted trial-name labels. Classified by whether the 95% confidence interval excludes 1.0, 58 estimates are statistically significant and 218 are not; the table below now puts the significant rows on top and shades non-significant rows gray.

Reported HR estimates found, by trial label

Bar length = number of extracted HR rows per label — a count of published estimates, not trial size or quality. Hover a bar for papers and outcomes.

Of 276 extracted estimates, 58 have a confidence interval that excludes 1.0 and 218 do not — roughly one in five reported hazard ratios reaches conventional statistical significance. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The Women's Health Initiative family contributes the most estimates: 88 HR rows across 7 papers under the main WHI label, plus 27 more under its calcium-plus-vitamin-D (CaD) arm label. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

VITAL is the most published trial here — 12 papers with 57 HR rows over 32 distinct outcomes, plus ancillary labels VITAL-T2D and VITAL-DEP. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The most extreme point estimate is STURDY's frailty result — HR 0.22 (0.05–0.97), a small-event secondary analysis reported alongside a slow-gait HR of 1.58. link.springer.com

D-Health reported a myocardial infarction HR of 0.81 (0.67 to 0.98) while its overall major-cardiovascular-events HR of 0.91 crossed 1. vitamindwiki.com

Full evidence table

Every extracted estimate row, statistically significant results first. Filter by trial label, significance, or search; click the HR header to sort within each significance group. HR and CI are shown exactly as extracted.

Statistically significant — 95% CI excludes 1.0 (upper bound below 1.0 or lower bound above 1.0)Not statistically significant — CI includes or touches 1.0

Trial label	Paper	Outcome measure	HR ▾▴	CI	Significance	Source

Method: broad live-web systematic search conducted 2026-09-04. Inclusion: randomized vitamin D assignment and a reported hazard ratio with confidence interval; trials reporting only RR, OR, IRR, rate ratio, or mean differences are necessarily absent. 276 rows, 20 trial-name labels after semantic normalization (some are aliases or ancillary studies of the same parent trial), 39 distinct paper titles. Rows include primary, secondary, subgroup, sensitivity and ancillary analyses exactly as reported; calcium co-interventions are included where the randomized arm assigned vitamin D. Automated extraction can retain duplicate analytic variants or imperfect trial aliases. Significance here is classified solely by whether the extracted confidence interval excludes 1.0 (58 significant, 218 not); it does not account for multiplicity-adjusted p-values or whether an estimate was primary, secondary, subgroup, sensitivity, or exploratory. Not a regulatory-grade exhaustive bibliographic review.

This report was generated automatically by Keenable SELECT at a user's request, from publicly available web sources linked herein. Keenable does not review, verify, or endorse its contents and makes no representation as to accuracy, completeness, or timeliness; AI-based extraction may contain errors. Nothing in this report is investment, legal, financial, or other professional advice. All trademarks and referenced content remain the property of their respective owners; no affiliation or endorsement is implied. To report an error, rights concern, or request removal: legal@keenable.ai.