Objective: The objective was to provide guidelines to clinicians for the evaluation, treatment, and prevention of vitamin D deficiency with an emphasis on the care of patients who are at risk for deficiency. Participants: The Task Force was composed of a Chair, six additional experts, and a methodologist. The Task Force received no corporate funding or remuneration. Consensus Process: Consensus was guided by systematic reviews of evidence and discussions during several conference calls and e-mail communications. The draft prepared by the Task Force was reviewed successively by The Endocrine Society's Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee, Clinical Affairs Core Committee, and cosponsoring associations, and it was posted on The Endocrine Society web site for member review. At each stage of review, the Task Force received written comments and incorporated needed changes. Conclusions: Considering that vitamin D deficiency is very common in all age groups and that few foods contain vitamin D, the Task Force recomme...

/pdf/evaluation-treatment-and-prevention-of-vitamin-d-deficiency-4wt9apc7iy.pdf

Evaluation, Treatment, and Prevention of Vitamin D Deficiency: an Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline

OBJECTIVE\nThe objective was to provide guidelines to clinicians for the evaluation, treatment, and prevention of vitamin D deficiency with an emphasis on the care of patients who are at risk for deficiency.\n\n\nPARTICIPANTS\nThe Task Force was composed of a Chair, six additional experts, and a methodologist. The Task Force received no corporate funding or remuneration.\n\n\nCONSENSUS PROCESS\nConsensus was guided by systematic reviews of evidence and discussions during several conference calls and e-mail communications. The draft prepared by the Task Force was reviewed successively by The Endocrine Society's Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee, Clinical Affairs Core Committee, and cosponsoring associations, and it was posted on The Endocrine Society web site for member review. At each stage of review, the Task Force received written comments and incorporated needed changes.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nConsidering that vitamin D deficiency is very common in all age groups and that few foods contain vitamin D, the Task Force recommended supplementation at suggested daily intake and tolerable upper limit levels, depending on age and clinical circumstances. The Task Force also suggested the measurement of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level by a reliable assay as the initial diagnostic test in patients at risk for deficiency. Treatment with either vitamin D(2) or vitamin D(3) was recommended for deficient patients. At the present time, there is not sufficient evidence to recommend screening individuals who are not at risk for deficiency or to prescribe vitamin D to attain the noncalcemic benefit for cardiovascular protection.

Evaluation, treatment, and prevention of vitamin D deficiency: An endocrine society clinical practice guideline (Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism (2011) 96, (1911-1930))

http://diposit.ub.edu/dspace/bitstream/2445/122776/1/gbd2016riskfactorscollaborators2017_3028.pdf

Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks in 188 countries, 1990-2013: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(13)60937-X.pdf

Maternal and child undernutrition and overweight in low-income and middle-income countries

Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems

The charge to the committee (Institute of Medicine Committee to Review Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin D and Calcium) was to assess current relevant data and update, as appropriate, the DRIs (Dietary Reference Intakes) for vitamin D and calcium. The review was to include consideration of chronic disease indicators (e.g., reduction in risk of cancer) and other (non-chronic disease) indicators and health outcomes. The definitions of these terms are discussed below. Consistent with the framework for DRI development, the indicators to assess adequacy and excess intake were to be selected based on the strength and quality of the evidence and their demonstrated public health significance, taking into consideration sources of uncertainty in the evidence. Further, the committee deliberations were to incorporate, as appropriate, systematic evidence-based reviews of the literature.Specifically, in carrying out its work, the committee was to: Review evidence on indicators to assess adequacy and indicators to assess excess intake relevant to the general North American population, including groups whose needs for or sensitivity to the nutrient may be affected by particular conditions that are widespread in the population such as obesity or age-related chronic diseases. Special groups under medical care whose needs or sensitivities are affected by rare genetic disorders or diseases and their treatments were to be excluded; Consider systematic evidence-based reviews, including those made available by the sponsors as well as others, and carefully document the approach used by the committee to carry out any of its own literature reviews; Regarding selection of indicators upon which to base DRI values for adequate intake, give priority to selecting indicators relevant to the various age, gender, and life stage groups that will allow for the determination of an Estimated Average Requirement (EAR); Regarding selection of indicators upon which to base DRI values for upper levels of intake, give priority to examining whether a critical adverse effect can be selected that will allow for the determination of a so-called benchmark intake; Update DRI values, as appropriate, using a risk assessment approach that includes (1) identification of potential indicators to assess adequacy and excess intake, (2) selection of the indicators of adequacy and excess intake, (3) intake-response assessment, (4) dietary intake assessment, and (5) risk characterization. Identify research gaps to address the uncertainties identified in the process of deriving the reference values and evaluating their public health implications.

Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D

Committee to Review Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin D and Calcium

The term Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) is new to the field of nutrition. It refers to a set of at least four nutrient-based reference values that can be used for planning and assessing diets and for many other purposes. The development of DRIs replaces the periodic revisions of Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs), which have been published since 1941 by the National Academy of Sciences. This is a comprehensive effort being undertaken by the Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of Dietary Reference Intakes of the Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, with the involvement of Health Canada.

Dietary Reference Intakes

Despite efforts over the past several decades to reduce sodium intake in the United States, adults still consume an average of 3,400 mg of sodium every day. A number of scientific bodies and professional health organizations, including the American Heart Association, the American Medical Association, and the American Public Health Association, support reducing dietary sodium intake. These organizations support a common goal to reduce daily sodium intake to less than 2,300 milligrams and further reduce intake to 1,500 mg among persons who are 51 years of age and older and those of any age who are African-American or have hypertension, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease. A substantial body of evidence supports these efforts to reduce sodium intake. This evidence links excessive dietary sodium to high blood pressure, a surrogate marker for cardiovascular disease (CVD), stroke, and cardiac-related mortality. However, concerns have been raised that a low sodium intake may adversely affect certain risk factors, including blood lipids and insulin resistance, and thus potentially increase risk of heart disease and stroke. In fact, several recent reports have challenged sodium reduction in the population as a strategy to reduce this risk. Sodium Intake in Populations recognizes the limitations of the available evidence, and explains that there is no consistent evidence to support an association between sodium intake and either a beneficial or adverse effect on most direct health outcomes other than some CVD outcomes (including stroke and CVD mortality) and all-cause mortality. Some evidence suggested that decreasing sodium intake could possibly reduce the risk of gastric cancer. However, the evidence was too limited to conclude the converse-that higher sodium intake could possibly increase the risk of gastric cancer. Interpreting these findings was particularly challenging because most studies were conducted outside the United States in populations consuming much higher levels of sodium than those consumed in this country. Sodium Intake in Populations is a summary of the findings and conclusions on evidence for associations between sodium intake and risk of CVD-related events and mortality.

Sodium Intake in Populations: Assessment of Evidence

/pdf/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-1wqezpa5ed.pdf

Ann L. Yaktine

Papers

Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D

Committee to Review Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin D and Calcium

Dietary Reference Intakes

Sodium Intake in Populations: Assessment of Evidence

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program