Knowledge · Natural Compounds

Vitamin D

Vitamin D: What 339 human studies show, including 228 randomized controlled trials – ordered by area of application and strength of evidence.

Last updated:

We evaluated 339 human studies on Vitamin D, including 228 randomised controlled trials and 88 meta-analyses or systematic reviews; the controlled studies include 142,839 participants in total. As of 3 October 2026.

This page as PDF · Summary

1. What Is Vitamin D? Occurrence, Origin and Forms

Vitamin D is a group of fat-soluble vitamins, the most important being vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) and vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol). The body makes vitamin D3 itself in the skin when it is exposed to the sun's UVB radiation; the liver and kidneys convert it into the storage form 25-hydroxyvitamin D and the active hormone form.

Food provides little vitamin D, mainly from oily sea fish, cod liver oil, egg yolk and mushrooms exposed to UV light. At our latitudes, sunlight in the winter half-year is hardly enough for the body's own production.

Vitamin D3 for supplements is mostly obtained from wool fat (lanolin), for vegan products from lichen; vitamin D2 is made from yeast or fungi. Studies test daily, weekly or infrequent high single doses.

Forms and Preparations Studied

  • Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) as capsule, tablet or drops
  • Vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol)
  • Calcifediol (25-hydroxyvitamin D) taken by mouth
  • Vitamin D combined with calcium, vitamin K2 or omega-3
  • Sunlight and UVB light for the body's own production

Not covered on this page:

  • Active vitamin D hormones and analogues as medicines (calcitriol, alfacalcidol, paricalcitol) in kidney and parathyroid disease
  • Topical vitamin D analogues for psoriasis (calcipotriol)

2. What Does Vitamin D Do? Results by Area

AreaResult in controlled studiesStrength of evidenceStudiesParticipants
Infections and immune systemmostly improvedhigh19 meta-analyses · 40 controlled · 6 other7,232
Bones, falls and fracturesmixedhigh6 meta-analyses · 41 controlled · 8 other11,754
Blood sugar and metabolismmixedhigh14 meta-analyses · 31 controlled · 6 other46,556
Heart, circulation and blood pressuremostly no differencehigh11 meta-analyses · 30 controlled · 3 other26,146
Mood and depressionmostly improvedhigh5 meta-analyses · 17 controlled · 0 other4,067
Pregnancy and childrenmixedhigh5 meta-analyses · 10 controlled · 5 other5,476
Autoimmune diseasesmostly improvedhigh4 meta-analyses · 3 controlled · 1 other416
Muscle strengthmostly improvedmoderate2 meta-analyses · 19 controlled · 3 other3,004
Cancer risk and coursemixedlow0 meta-analyses · 7 controlled · 1 other22,796
Other outcomesmostly improvedhigh41 meta-analyses · 171 controlled · 22 other57,783

How to read the table: counted are human studies whose results concern the area. “High” means at least one meta-analysis and two controlled studies showing improvement, or at least three controlled studies of which three quarters show improvement, with at least 300 participants in total. “Moderate” means at least two controlled studies showing improvement, as a majority, or one meta-analysis alongside controlled studies. “Low” means one controlled study showing improvement. Where an area has no controlled study, the strength of evidence is at most “low” (result “reviews only” or “observational data only”). Everything else is “unclear”. A study counts as showing improvement when at least half of its outcomes in this area improved. Reviews of combination products do not count as meta-analyses; results that only describe side effects or shares of users do not count as an effect. The same study is counted only once.

3. What the Studies Show in Detail

Vitamin D, Infections and Immune System: Human Studies

For COVID-19, mortality under vitamin D was lower in two meta-analyses and one controlled study, but not robust in one meta-analysis 3153225. In this meta-analysis, ICU admission and ventilation remained without a difference 53, and one review warns that small studies overestimate the benefit 84. In children with asthma, severe attacks decreased in a meta-analysis compared with placebo and in a controlled study under a higher dose 46191. Inflammation markers such as CRP fell more strongly in meta-analyses in type 2 diabetes and in dialysis patients than under control 3664. Overall, vitamin D did not prevent respiratory infections in children in two meta-analyses and one controlled study 1324134, but in schoolchildren in winter the number of days of illness fell 159. Vitamin D did not prevent tuberculosis in one meta-analysis 14. Investigated were predominantly oral vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) and vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol) preparations as well as calcifediol. The results depend on form, dose and baseline levels, and many studies were small or short.

StudyDesign · participantsPreparation · dose · duration · comparisonResult
2 Chen et al. 2021meta-analysis · 536,105 participantsVitamin D supplements (form not specified); vs. placebo/control or higher vs. lower vitamin D levelsCOVID-19 infection risk with vitamin D deficiency <20 ng/ml: no difference (OR for < 20 ng/ml: 1.61, 95% CI: 0.92-2.80); in-hospital death with vitamin D deficiency <20 ng/ml: no difference (OR for < 20 ng/ml: 2.18, 95% CI: 0.91-5.26); in-hospital death with vitamin D insufficiency <30 ng/ml: no difference (OR for < 30 ng/ml: 3.07, 95% CI: 0.64-14.78)
9 Wang et al. 2024meta-analysis · 35,160 participantsVitamin D supplements; vs. PlaceboAntibiotic use in the general population: no difference (OR = 0.98, p = 0.232); Antibiotic use in elderly participants: no difference (OR = 0.98, p = 0.295); Antibiotic use in participants under 70 years: improved (OR = 0.95, p = 0.015)
11 Meng et al. 2025meta-analysis · 19,586 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. Placebo or standard treatmenttuberculosis infection (prevention): unclear (RR 0·75; 95% CI 0·56 to 1·01); sputum smear conversion: no difference; sputum culture conversion: no difference
13 Wang et al. 2025meta-analysis · 18,372 participantsOral vitamin D supplementation; Daily low-dose ≤ 1000 IU/day vs. higher doses; vs. Placebo or no treatmentARI incidence: no difference (RR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.06); Hospitalization duration: no difference (MD = 0.03 days, 95% CI: -0.72 to 0.78); Recovery time: no difference (MD = -4.36 h, 95% CI: -11.87 to 3.15)
14 Liu et al. 2025meta-analysis · 15,677 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. PlaceboRisk of tuberculosis infection: no difference (OR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.79-1.14; p = 0.55); Development of active tuberculosis: no difference (OR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.56-1.05; p = 0.10)
17 Hsu et al. 2026systematic review · 11,600 participantsVitamin D supplements (form not reported); vs. Placebo or control in included RCTsIL-10 in asthma: unclear (Hedges'g = 18.85, p = 0.04)
18 Patchen et al. 2025systematic review · 10,611 participantsvitamin D (form not specified); 200 IU/day to 100,000 IU bolus quarterly; 28 days to two years; vs. placebo/no supplementation or low/standard dose (≤400 IU/day)childhood airway infections (pregnant/breastfeeding women): no difference (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04; 3 studies, 1564 participants; moderate-certainty evidence)
21 Goswami et al. 2025systematic review · 4,415 participantsVitamin D for prophylaxis; 1000 IU or 5000 IU; 4 to 16 weeks; vs. Placebo or lower doseInfluenza-like illness: improved; Respiratory infections: no difference

Further studies in this area: 24 28 31 32 36 46 52 53 64 66 75 77 84 97 102 108 134 143 147 149 150 155 156 159 163 169 180 191 198 203 207 214 225 226 227 237 238 239 245 256 262 269 273 280 285 287 292 295 296 306 309 317 318 326 327 328 336

Vitamin D, Bones, Falls and Fractures: Human Studies

Children whose mothers received cholecalciferol during pregnancy had higher bone density at primary school age than after placebo 116. In children and young adults with HIV, a relatively high daily dose improved bone density in a meta-analysis 50. For falls in independently living older people, one meta-analysis and two controlled studies found no difference 1094145. Three meta-analyses, by contrast, found fewer falls, depending on dose, daily administration and baseline levels 456. Fewer bone fractures appeared in one meta-analysis only when vitamin D was given together with calcium 6. The strength of evidence in the table is high, but the results depend strongly on form, dose and accompanying supplementation; it remains open which groups and dosages actually benefit.

StudyDesign · participantsPreparation · dose · duration · comparisonResult
4 Wei et al. 2022meta-analysis · 61,350 participantsVitamin D supplement, partly with calcium; high-dose ≥700 IU to 2000 IU daily vs. <700 IU; vs. placebo or no treatmentfall incidence (high-dose vitamin D): improved (RR, 0.87 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.96)); fall incidence (low-dose vitamin D): no difference
5 Tan et al. 2024meta-analysis · 58,937 participantsVitamin D, calcium, or combined supplementation; 800-1000 IU/day vs. >1000 IU/day; vs. Placebo, no treatment, calcium aloneFall risk with 800-1000 IU/day vitamin D: improved (RR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.74-0.95); Fall risk with daily 800-1000 IU/day: improved (RR = 0.78, 95%CI:0.64-0.92); Fall risk with intermittent administration: no difference
6 Thanapluetiwong et al. 2020meta-analysis · 58,424 participantsVitamin D supplement, partly with calcium; vs. Placebo or control in RCTsFall incidence: improved (RR = 0.948 (95% CI 0.914-0.984; P = .004, I = 41.52)); Fall incidence (vitamin D with calcium): improved (RR = 0.881 (95% CI 0.821-0.945; P < .001, I = 49.19)); Fractures: no difference (RR = 0.949 (95% CI 0.846-1.064; P = .37, I = 37.92))
7 Cong et al. 2025meta-analysis · 43,869 participantsvitamin D plus calcium; vs. control/placebobone mineral density at the pelvis: improved (SMD = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05–0.35, p = 0.01); BMD at lumbar spine, femoral neck, total hip: no difference; fracture risk: no difference (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.89–1.07, p = 0.68)
8 Migliorini et al. 2025systematic review · 43,397 participantsVitamin D and/or calcium supplementation; mean 92.8 ± 228.7 IU vitamin D and 833.6 ± 224.0 mg calcium daily; mean follow-up 25.8 ± 13.3 months; vs. different doses or two or more treatmentsbone mineral density (spine, hip, femur neck): no difference; serum bone turnover markers (bone-ALP, NTX, CTX): no difference; pathological vertebral and non-vertebral fractures: no difference
10 Torres-Lopez et al. 2025meta-analysis · 23,211 participantsvitamin D supplements; ≤1000 IU/day vs. >1000 IU/day, daily or intermittent; ≤12 months vs. >12 months; vs. placebo or controlfall risk: no difference (OR = 0.99; 95%CI: 0.95-1.03); fall risk in women: no difference (OR = 0.97; 95%CI: 0.92-1.02); fall risk in men: no difference (OR = 1.08; 95%CI: 0.98-1.20)
16 Yang et al. 2021meta-analysis · 11,890 participantsVitamin D (DMOAD class); at least 12 months follow-up; vs. other DMOAD classes or controlPain: improved (- 0.15 [- 0.27, -0.03]); Function: improved (- 0.18 [- 0.31, - 0.06])
50 Nguyen et al. 2023meta-analysis · 966 participantsVitamin D supplementation (ergocalciferol or cholecalciferol); 400 to 7000 IU/d; higher dose 1600-4000 IU/d vs. standard 400-800 IU/d; 6 to 24 months; vs. Placebo or higher vs. standard doseSpine BMD at 12 months: no difference (SMD: -0.09; 95% CI: -0.47, 0.3; P = 0.65); Total BMD at 12 months, higher vs. standard dose: improved (SMD: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.44; P = 0.03); Spine BMD at 12 months, higher vs. standard dose: unclear (SMD: 0.3; 95% CI: -0.02, 0.61; P = 0.07)

Further studies in this area: 56 64 77 80 83 94 95 104 112 116 117 119 121 122 143 145 148 151 152 157 160 170 179 181 185 204 216 227 235 236 243 254 266 267 268 270 273 278 279 286 289 297 302 312 315 316 332

Vitamin D, Blood Sugar and Metabolism: Human Studies

In adults with type 2 diabetes and in women with polycystic ovary syndrome, several controlled studies showed improvements in fasting glucose, HbA1c and insulin resistance under oral vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) 3660261. Markers of beta cell function such as C-peptide and HOMA-β developed more favorably compared with the control in type 2 diabetes, prediabetes and newly detected type 1 diabetes in children 241299301. Under ergocalciferol, by contrast, stimulated C-peptide in young people with new type 1 diabetes remained without a difference 280. In contrast, the large randomized studies in adults without diabetes found no difference in newly occurring type 2 diabetes 8990. In healthy people, HbA1c, lipoproteins and BMI remained without a difference 21. In fatty liver disease, there was no difference in insulin resistance, fasting glucose and fasting insulin 62. In adult men with type 2 diabetes, insulin resistance, fasting glucose, insulin, HbA1c and lipid profile remained without a difference 298. In several studies, supplementation raised the vitamin D level in the blood 27215280299. Investigated were predominantly oral vitamin D3 preparations, sometimes vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol). In women with polycystic ovary syndrome, insulin resistance and fasting glucose improved in a meta-analysis, more strongly with metformin than under vitamin D alone 52. One study compared low and higher dosed vitamin D3 with calcium citrate and found no difference between the doses for markers of insulin resistance 154. Vitamin D3 together with whey protein and strength training resulted in no difference in HbA1c and insulin resistance 163. It remains open which patient groups and which dose or form actually benefit, since the results are inconsistent between populations and measured variables.

StudyDesign · participantsPreparation · dose · duration · comparisonResult
17 Hsu et al. 2026systematic review · 11,600 participantsVitamin D supplements (form not reported); vs. Placebo or control in included RCTsCRP in abnormal glucose homeostasis: improved (Hedges'g = - 0.67); TNF-α in abnormal glucose homeostasis: improved (Hedges'g = - 0.81); IL-6 in abnormal glucose homeostasis: improved (Hedges'g = - 1.93)
20 Kretschmer et al. 2025meta-analysis · 4,478 participantsoral vitamin D supplementation; study duration 0.5 to 5 years, at least 6 months; vs. placeboRegression to normal glucose regulation: improved (1.27 (95% CI, 1.12-1.45))
21 Goswami et al. 2025systematic review · 4,415 participantsVitamin D for prophylaxis; 1000 IU or 5000 IU; 4 to 16 weeks; vs. Placebo or lower doseHemoglobin-A1c, lipoproteins, BMI: no difference
23 Martinekova et al. 2025meta-analysis · 4,084 participantsVitamin D supplementation; 6 to 12 months follow-up; vs. Control group without vitamin DHOMA-IR: improved (MD, -0.31; 95% CI, -0.62 to -0.01); Triglycerides: improved (MD, -7.59 mg/dL; 95% CI, -15.09 to -0.81); Insulin: improved (MD -0.79 μIU/L; 95% CI, -1.36 to -0.21)
27 Gong et al. 2025meta-analysis · 3,460 participantsVitamin D supplementation; 500 IU to 60,000 IU; 3 to 12 months; vs. Control groupSerum 25(OH)D: improved (SMD: 4.01; 95% CI: 2.43 to 5.59; p < 0.001); HbA1c: no difference (SMD: 0.08; 95% CI: -0.25 to 0.37); HOMA-IR: no difference (SMD: 5.95; 95% CI: -2.87 to 14.77)
35 Hu et al. 2023meta-analysis · 2,362 participantsVitamin D as nutritional supplement; vs. Placebo and other nutritional supplementsTotal cholesterol (TC): improved
36 M et al. 2026meta-analysis · 2,000 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. Placebo or control in randomized trialsHbA1c: improved (MD = −0.42%, 95% CI: −0.32 to −0.16; I² = 27%); Fasting blood glucose: improved (MD = −9.5 mg/dL; I² = 16%); HOMA-IR: improved (MD = −0.98; I² = 60%)
51 Liu et al. 2026meta-analysis · 962 participantsvitamin D supplementation; higher daily doses, particularly up to 5,000 IU/day; vs. placeboBMI, weight, and IL-6: no difference

Further studies in this area: 52 60 62 66 71 73 77 78 89 90 128 149 150 154 157 163 175 176 180 187 205 215 216 224 236 238 241 261 263 264 265 276 278 279 280 291 298 299 301 323 330 337 339

Vitamin D, Heart, Circulation and Blood Pressure: Human Studies

For heart, circulation and blood pressure, results without a difference predominate. Several controlled studies found no change in blood pressure under vitamin D 2190107157187228. Cardiovascular mortality also remained unchanged in several controlled studies 86109139. One meta-analysis showed a lower frequency of postoperative atrial fibrillation in patients after coronary bypass surgery 58. Individual blood lipid values improved in reviews in type 2 diabetes and diabetic kidney disease 363977, but not in overweight children and adolescents 73. The evidence is overall high, since numerous controlled studies and meta-analyses are available. It remains open whether certain groups or dosages do benefit.

StudyDesign · participantsPreparation · dose · duration · comparisonResult
1 An et al. 2022meta-analysis · 883,627 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. Control group without vitamin DCardiovascular or type 2 diabetes risk: no difference (no effect)
3 Fu et al. 2022meta-analysis · 86,202 participantsVitamin D supplements (cholecalciferol, ergocalciferol, calcifediol); various dosages, subgroup analysis; various follow-up periods; vs. placeborisk of stroke: no difference (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.93-1.13, P = 0.65)
21 Goswami et al. 2025systematic review · 4,415 participantsVitamin D for prophylaxis; 1000 IU or 5000 IU; 4 to 16 weeks; vs. Placebo or lower doseCholesterol: improved (5000 IU Vitamin D for four weeks significantly reduced cholesterol, unlike 1000 IU for 16 weeks); Blood pressures: no difference
32 Pilkey et al. 2023systematic review · 2,489 participantsnative vitamin D (D2/D3); mostly short follow-up; vs. control/placebo in randomized trialscardiovascular disease: unclear
36 M et al. 2026meta-analysis · 2,000 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. Placebo or control in randomized trialsLDL cholesterol: improved (MD = −5.85 mg/dL; I² = 22%); Triglycerides: improved (MD = −6.51 mg/dL; I² = 0%)
39 Lu et al. 2024meta-analysis · 1,711 participantsVitamin D supplementation; higher doses more favorable (subgroup analysis); shorter intervention more favorable (subgroup analysis); vs. control/placebo in 20 RCTsHDL cholesterol: improved (MD: 1.63 mg/dL, 95% CI: 0.19 to 3.08, P = 0.03); triglycerides: improved (MD: -8.56 mg/dL, 95% CI: -15.23 to -1.89, P = 0.01); LDL cholesterol: no difference
58 Nisa et al. 2026meta-analysis · 694 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. Placebo or controlIncidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation: improved (RR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.76; P=0.0003)
59 Ashraf et al. 2025meta-analysis · 694 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. Control/placebo in 4 randomized trialsIncidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation: improved (RR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.76; P = 0.0003)

Further studies in this area: 66 73 77 86 90 107 109 126 129 139 143 150 157 160 167 176 187 203 214 215 219 227 228 234 260 261 263 264 270 276 278 279 288 313 320 321

Vitamin D, Mood and Depression: Human Studies

In adults with diagnosed depression, vitamin D improved depressive symptoms compared with placebo in one meta-analysis and one controlled study 51150. In women with premenstrual syndrome, vitamin D supplementation improved depression, but not anxiety 74. In adults with type 2 diabetes and depressive symptoms, cholecalciferol lowered the depression score more strongly than placebo 241. In perimenopausal women with vitamin D deficiency, cholecalciferol improved mood 208. In children with ADHD, vitamin D3 plus magnesium improved emotional problems 249251. In the same group, vitamin D3 plus magnesium improved anxiety and shyness 250. Vitamin D3 together with zinc improved depressive symptoms in overweight adults 182. In children with autism spectrum disorder, vitamin D reduced irritability and hyperactivity compared with placebo 200. In contrast, a large randomized controlled study with vitamin D3 over several years found no difference in the frequency of newly occurring major depressive disorder 96. A randomized controlled study with cholecalciferol in addition to depression treatment found no difference in the MADRS score 140. In adolescents with vitamin D deficiency and depressive symptoms, vitamin D showed an advantage on only one of three depression scales; the inflammation marker CRP did not change this 220. In adults with chronic spinal cord injury, anxiety and depression remained without a difference under vitamin D3 273. A systematic review on native vitamin D (D2/D3) saw no difference in patient-reported well-being in adults with end-stage renal failure 32. The studies are often small and differ in dose, form and population. Vitamin D did not change the serotonin level in the blood in one meta-analysis 79.

StudyDesign · participantsPreparation · dose · duration · comparisonResult
12 Park et al. 2026systematic review · 18,628 participantsVitamin D supplementation; 2,000 IU daily to 50,000 IU weekly; 6 months to 5.3 years; vs. Placebo or controlDepressive symptoms: improved (p < .050); Depressive symptoms (one trial): no difference; Depression incidence: no difference (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.87~1.09)
32 Pilkey et al. 2023systematic review · 2,489 participantsnative vitamin D (D2/D3); mostly short follow-up; vs. control/placebo in randomized trialspatient-reported well-being: no difference
51 Liu et al. 2026meta-analysis · 962 participantsvitamin D supplementation; higher daily doses, particularly up to 5,000 IU/day; vs. placebochange in depressive symptoms: improved (SMD: -0.98; 95% CI - 1.28 to -0.68; p < 0.001)
74 Zainab et al. 2026meta-analysis · 436 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. Placebo or standard careDepression: improved (SMD: -0.78, 95% CI: -1.53, -0.02); Anxiety: no difference
79 Alimohammadi-Kamalabadi et al. 2024meta-analysis · 356 participantsVitamin D supplementation; some below 4000 IU/day; some 10 weeks or longer; vs. control groupserum serotonin levels: no difference (SMD: 0.24 ng/mL, 95% CI: -0.28, 0.75, p > 0.10)
96 Ahl et al. 2026randomised controlled · 2,434 participantsVitamin D3; 1600 IU/day or 3200 IU/day; 5 years supplementation, follow-up until end of 2021; vs. PlaceboIncidence of major depressive disorder during 5 years: no difference (HR, 0.78; 95 % CI 0.35-1.71; P = 0.53); Incidence of major depressive disorder during 5 years: no difference (HR, 0.57; 95 % CI 0.24-1.35; P = 0.20); Incidence of major depressive disorder during extended follow-up: no difference (HR, 0.61; 95 % CI 0.34-1.10; P = 0.10)
140 Mikola et al. 2026randomised controlled · 281 participantsVitamin D (cholecalciferol) as adjunct to existing depression treatment; 100 µg (4000 IU) daily versus 10 µg (400 IU) daily; six months; vs. high-dose versus low-dose vitamin Dchange in MADRS score: no difference (Cohen's d = -0.09; 95% CI -0.32 to 0.14)
150 Porto et al. 2025randomised controlled · 224 participantsvitamin D supplementation; 50,000 IU per week; six months; vs. placebo (n=112)depressive symptoms: improved (p = 0.001); suicide risk: improved (p = 0.001)

Further studies in this area: 182 187 200 202 208 220 232 241 249 250 251 257 273 315

Vitamin D, Pregnancy and Children: Human Studies

A review with meta-analysis found less gestational diabetes and a somewhat higher birth weight 85. With cholecalciferol, spontaneous vaginal births occurred more often because instrumental delivery was less frequent 101. For preeclampsia, two meta-analyses found a lower risk 3382. Another review and a controlled study saw no difference there 85107. For gestational hypertension, no difference was shown 107, as was also the case for prematurity 85101. The results depend on form, dose and baseline levels, and many studies were small.

StudyDesign · participantsPreparation · dose · duration · comparisonResult
17 Hsu et al. 2026systematic review · 11,600 participantsVitamin D supplements (form not reported); vs. Placebo or control in included RCTsMDA in pregnant women: improved (Hedges'g = - 0.46); TAC in pregnant women: improved (Hedges'g = 2.13); glutathione in pregnant women: improved (Hedges'g = 4.37)
19 Shi et al. 2026meta-analysis · 10,262 participantsCombined supplement with magnesium, zinc, calcium and vitamin D; vs. Standard controlcesarean section rate: no difference (RR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.15, 1.29)
33 Kokkinari et al. 2025meta-analysis · 2,461 participantsVitamin D supplementation during pregnancy; heterogeneous, not specified; not reported; vs. no supplementation (RCT control groups)risk of pre-eclampsia: improved (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: [0.50-0.75], p < 0.001)
76 Saha et al. 2020meta-analysis · 380 participantsVitamin D containing supplements; vs. PlaceboRisk of cesarean section: improved (RR: 0.61, p=0.002, 95% CI: 0.44,0.83); Risk of macrosomia: improved (RR: 0.31, p=0.006, 95% CI: 0.13,0.72); Pre-eclampsia, preterm delivery, polyhydramnios: no difference
82 Wang et al. 2026meta-analysisOral nutritional supplements, including vitamin D; vs. Placebo and calciumPreeclampsia: improved (OR=0. 34, 95% CI 0.17, 0.65); Gestational hypertension: no difference
85 Yang et al. 2025systematic reviewVitamin D supplements; Median 2000 IU/day (range 400-60 000); vs. Placebo, no intervention, or active control (≤600 IU/day)Risk of preeclampsia: no difference (RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.43-1.53]); Risk of gestational diabetes mellitus: improved (RR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.49-0.86); Infant birth weight: improved (53 g (95% CI, 16-90))
99 Subramanian et al. 2025randomised controlled · 1,298 participantsVitamin D3 supplement; 4200, 16,800 or 28,000 IU per week; from mid-pregnancy until birth; vs. placeboplacental VEGF-A expression: no difference; placental PlGF expression: no difference; number and surface area of terminal villi: no difference
101 Moon et al. 2023randomised controlled · 965 participantsCholecalciferol 1000 IU/day; 1000 IU daily; from 14 weeks' gestation until delivery; vs. placebo, double-blind randomizedpreterm birth: no difference (cholecalciferol 5.7%, placebo 4.5%, P = 0.43); spontaneous vaginal delivery: improved (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02,1.25); instrumental delivery: improved (RR 0.68, 95%CI 0.51,0.91)

Further studies in this area: 103 106 107 133 149 175 183 198 311 323 325 331

Vitamin D and Autoimmune Diseases: Human Studies

In systemic lupus erythematosus, vitamin D reduced disease activity and improved complement values C3 and C4 in a meta-analysis 55. In rheumatoid arthritis, disease activity and pain decreased compared with the control group 211. In clinically isolated syndrome, an early form of multiple sclerosis, cholecalciferol reduced MRI activity and new lesions compared with placebo, but not relapses 132. A meta-analysis in multiple sclerosis found a lower annual relapse rate only at low to medium dose, with no overall difference 49. A systematic review of vitamin D3 and/or vitamin D2 saw protection against autoimmune reactions 21. In a large placebo-controlled study, vitamin D reduced the number of confirmed autoimmune diseases over five years, while omega-3 fatty acids alone did not significantly 305. These are contrasted by results showing no difference: The EDSS score remained unchanged in the MS meta-analysis 49. In lupus, no differences were shown in erythrocyte sedimentation rate and anti-dsDNA levels 55. Another lupus meta-analysis found no difference in either the disease activity index or anti-dsDNA positivity 70. The evidence is strong, but the studies tested different forms and doses, and the participant numbers of the individual controlled studies remain partly small 132211.

StudyDesign · participantsPreparation · dose · duration · comparisonResult
21 Goswami et al. 2025systematic review · 4,415 participantsVitamin D for prophylaxis; 1000 IU or 5000 IU; 4 to 16 weeks; vs. Placebo or lower doseProtection against autoimmune reactions: improved
49 Zhang et al. 2025meta-analysis · 1,078 participantsVitamin D supplementation; low/medium dose vs. high dose (subgroups); vs. intervention group vs. control groupAnnualized relapse rate (ARR): no difference (pooled MD = -0.07, 95%CI [-0.18,0.03], Z = -1.37, p = 0.17); Annualized relapse rate, low/medium dose: improved (pooled MD = -0.14, 95%CI [-0.26, -0.03], p = 0.01); Annualized relapse rate, high dose: no difference (pooled MD = 0.05, 95%CI [-0.08, 0.18], p = 0.42)
55 Lu et al. 2026meta-analysis · 847 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. Control group (placebo/standard care)Disease activity in SLE: improved (SMD = -0.54, p < 0.001); Complement component C3: improved (MD = 14.49, p = 0.03); Complement component C4: improved (SMD = 2.08, p = 0.04)
70 Zheng et al. 2019meta-analysis · 490 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. PlaceboSLE disease activity index score: no difference (SMD = -0.507, 95% CI: -1.055-0.041, P = 0.070); Positivity of anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies: no difference (Risk ratio = 0.880, 95% CI: 0.734-1.054, P = 0.165)
132 Thouvenot et al. 2025randomised controlled · 316 participantsoral cholecalciferol 100 000 IU vs placebo; 100 000 IU every 2 weeks; 24 months; vs. placebo, double-blind randomizeddisease activity (relapse and/or MRI activity): improved (HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.50-0.87]; P = .004); MRI activity: improved (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.53-0.95]; P = .02); new lesions: improved (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.44-0.84]; P = .003)
211 Rexhepi et al. 2025randomised controlled · 100 participantsVitamin D 4000 IU/day; 4000 IU/day; 6 months; vs. RA patients without vitamin D supplementationDisease activity (DAS28): improved (U'=2285.5; P < 0.0001)
305 Hahn et al. 2022randomised controlledVitamin D (2000 IU/day) or placebo, plus omega 3 fatty acids or placebo; 2000 IU/day vitamin D; 1000 mg/day omega 3 fatty acids; median 5.3 years follow-up; vs. placebo (two-by-two factorial design)Confirmed autoimmune disease (vitamin D arm vs placebo): improved (hazard ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.99, P=0.05); Confirmed autoimmune disease (omega 3 arm vs placebo): no difference (0.85, 0.67 to 1.08, P=0.19); Confirmed autoimmune disease (vitamin D plus omega 3 vs reference arm): improved (0.69, 0.49 to 0.96)
335 Basti et al. 2026cohort study · 101 participantsVitamin D3 supplementation; increase by 1000 IU/day, maximum 2000 IU/day; 12 months; vs. patients with low vs normal baseline 25(OH)D12-month disease relapse: no difference (7.3% vs 10%; p=0.64); relapses in patients who corrected vitamin D deficiency: improved (no relapses)

Vitamin D and Muscle Strength: Human Studies

In adults with chronic intestinal failure and vitamin D deficiency, intramuscularly administered ergocalciferol (vitamin D2) improved handgrip strength, 6-meter walking speed and skeletal muscle mass index 300. Children of mothers who received daily cholecalciferol during pregnancy had more lean mass at primary school age than after placebo 116. Together with exercise training, knee extension strength increased compared with training alone in a meta-analysis, and handgrip strength increased in older adults 40. A review found better values on the Short Physical Performance Battery and stair climbing 42. In older people with sarcopenia, vitamin D3 in addition to thermotherapy and strength training improved muscle mass and handgrip strength 180. In contrast, several controlled studies found no difference in hand and grip strength with administration of cholecalciferol or ergocalciferol alone 178217273, and vitamin D3 together with omega-3 fatty acids also did not change grip strength, walking speed and functional tests 100. The evidence is moderate; the results depend strongly on the form, the combination with training or protein and the group studied; whether supplementation alone, without accompanying measures, increases muscle strength remains open.

StudyDesign · participantsPreparation · dose · duration · comparisonResult
32 Pilkey et al. 2023systematic review · 2,489 participantsnative vitamin D (D2/D3); mostly short follow-up; vs. control/placebo in randomized trialsmuscle strength/function: unclear
37 Serag et al. 2025meta-analysis · 1,903 participantsVitamin D supplements as add-on therapy; Subgroup analysis: treatment longer than 12 months; vs. ControlsTimed 25-foot walk: no difference (p = 0.54)
40 Kazeminasab et al. 2025meta-analysis · 1,675 participantsvitamin D plus exercise; vitamin D dose in IU/wk, variable; vs. exercise aloneleg press strength: no difference (P > .05); knee extension strength: improved (WMD, 4.36 kg; P = .039); handgrip strength: improved
42 Zhang et al. 2025systematic review · 1,483 participantsVitamin D3 supplementation combined with exercise training; vs. Exercise intervention aloneShort Physical Performance Battery: improved; Stair climbing: improved; Skeletal muscle mass: no difference
63 Chang et al. 2023meta-analysis · 637 participantsWhey protein, leucine, and vitamin D; vs. Control group without nutritional supplementationAppendicular muscle mass: improved (significantly improved); Handgrip strength: no difference (no significant differences); SPPB score: no difference (no significant differences)
100 Chou et al. 2024randomised controlled · 1,054 participantsVitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) and/or marine omega-3 fatty acids vs placebo; 2000 IU/day vitamin D3; 1 g/day omega-3; 2 years; vs. placebo, 2x2 factorial designgrip strength: no difference; walking speed: no difference; Short Physical Performance Battery: no difference
116 Moon et al. 2024randomised controlled · 454 participantsCholecalciferol 1000 IU/d or placebo; 1000 IU per day; from 14-17 wk gestation until delivery; vs. PlaceboLean mass: improved (0.09 SD, 95% CI: 0.00, 0.17)
163 Miller et al. 2021randomised controlled · 198 participantsWhey protein plus vitamin D3, with progressive resistance training; 20 g whey protein each morning and postexercise; vitamin D3 2000 IU/day; 24 weeks; vs. Resistance training without supplementation30-s sit-to-stand performance: improved (1.0 [95% CI, -0.05, 1.5], p = .047)

Further studies in this area: 173 176 178 180 189 201 214 217 238 248 263 264 273 295 300 312

Vitamin D, Cancer Risk and Course: Human Studies

In cancer diseases, a mixed picture emerges: A randomized controlled study in patients with advanced cervical cancer undergoing radiotherapy found a higher rate of complete remissions with cholecalciferol 190, and another randomized controlled study in women with breast cancer before neoadjuvant chemotherapy reports pathological complete remission more often 231. In curatively resected gastrointestinal tumors, cholecalciferol improved recurrence-free survival in subgroups with low parathyroid hormone levels, while no difference occurred in the group with high parathyroid hormone levels 123; in digestive tract cancer, the effect on recurrence or death depended on vitamin A levels, with benefit at medium levels and disadvantage at the lowest levels 130. In contrast, the largest randomized controlled study in older adults found no difference in cancer incidence 91, and in curatively resected cutaneous melanoma, cholecalciferol showed no advantage in either recurrence-free survival or melanoma mortality 118. The evidence is overall low: The controlled studies are mostly small, concern different tumor types and treatment situations, and the positive findings come predominantly from subgroup or single studies; cholecalciferol was mostly studied as a capsule or tablet, sometimes daily, sometimes as a single dose. It remains open whether and for which tumor types and baseline levels administration actually helps.

StudyDesign · participantsPreparation · dose · duration · comparisonResult
91 Neale et al. 2025randomised controlled · 21,308 participantsVitamin D3 or placebo; 60,000 IU per month; up to 5 years; vs. placebocancer incidence (at least one cancer diagnosis): no difference (HR 1.02; 95 % CI 0.95-1.10); cancer incidence excluding cutaneous melanomas: no difference (HR 1.04; 95 % CI 0.95-1.14)
118 De et al. 2024randomised controlled · 436 participantsCholecalciferol (vitamin D3); 100 000 IU monthly; minimum 6, maximum 42 months; median follow-up 52 months; vs. Placebo (218 vs. 218)Relapse-free survival at 72 months: no difference (26.51% in the vitamin D supplemented arm (95% CI 19.37-35.64) vs. 20.70% (95% CI 14.26-29.52) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio 1.27, 95% CI 0.79-2.03; P = 0.32)); Melanoma-related deaths: no difference (n = 10 and n = 11, respectively)
123 Sasaki et al. 2026randomised controlled · 410 participantsVitamin D3 versus placebo; 2000 IU/day; maximum follow-up 7.5 years; vs. placebo, randomized double-blindrelapse-free survival (lower PTH subgroup): improved (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24-0.81; p = 0.008); relapse-free survival (higher PTH subgroup): no difference (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.64-2.44; p for interaction = 0.016); relapse-free survival (low PTH and p53-positive): improved (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.78; p = 0.009)
130 Kohmura et al. 2026randomised controlled · 363 participantsVitamin D3 supplementation versus placebo; 5-year relapse-free survival; vs. PlaceboRelapse or death (5-year RFS) in middle vitamin A range (deciles 6-8): improved (81.4% vs. 54.9%; HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.69; P = 0.004); Relapse or death in lowest vitamin A decile (decile 1): worsened (HR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.10-3.84; P = 0.03); Interaction vitamin A x vitamin D on relapse or death: unclear (Pinteraction = 0.008)
190 Suardi et al. 2025randomised controlled · 123 participantsCholecalciferol; 10 000 IU daily; 7 weeks during and 12 weeks after radiotherapy; vs. Placebo plus same radiotherapy protocolcomplete response rate: improved (82.61% in the Treatment group and 64.8% in the Control group)
231 Omodei et al. 2025randomised controlled · 80 participantsCholecalciferol 2,000 IU daily vs. placebo; 2,000 IU daily; 6 months; vs. placeboPathological complete response (pCR): improved (43% vs. 24%, p = 0.04)
237 Tirgar et al. 2024randomised controlled · 76 participantsVitamin D alone, synbiotics alone, or their combination vs. placebo; four months; vs. Placebopathological complete response (pCR): no difference; Ki-67 index: no difference
321 Yao et al. 2026cohort study · 3,995 participantsserum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels (no supplementation); median follow-up 12.2 years (0.2-16.3); vs. sufficient versus deficient vitamin D levelsoverall survival: improved (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.93; P for trend =.005); second primary cancer-free survival: improved (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.90; P for trend =.003); disease-free survival: improved (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70-0.97; P for trend =.05)

Vitamin D: Further Outcomes in Studies

In this area, numerous controlled studies and meta-analyses investigated very different outcome measures; the evidence is strong, but the results vary widely depending on the outcome. The storage form 25(OH)D in blood reliably increased, for example in meta-analyses in multiple sclerosis, lupus and fatty liver disease 495562. In diabetic foot ulcer, wounds healed more often than with control in a meta-analysis 66. Calcium, phosphate and urinary calcium values remained without difference between the groups in several studies 64119174204; in two studies, serum calcium increased 149267. Cholecalciferol (vitamin D3), ergocalciferol (vitamin D2) and calcifediol were predominantly studied as a capsule, tablet, drops or injection. It remains open which dose, form and treatment duration is actually of benefit for which patient group, since the studies included very different populations and comparison groups.

StudyDesign · participantsPreparation · dose · duration · comparisonResult
7 Cong et al. 2025meta-analysis · 43,869 participantsvitamin D plus calcium; vs. control/placeboserum 25-hydroxyvitamin D: improved (Z = 10.48, p < 0.001)
8 Migliorini et al. 2025systematic review · 43,397 participantsVitamin D and/or calcium supplementation; mean 92.8 ± 228.7 IU vitamin D and 833.6 ± 224.0 mg calcium daily; mean follow-up 25.8 ± 13.3 months; vs. different doses or two or more treatmentsgastrointestinal adverse events (r = - 0.5; P = 0.02); mortality: improved (r = - 0.7; P = 0.03)
11 Meng et al. 2025meta-analysis · 19,586 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. Placebo or standard treatmenttuberculosis score at 8 weeks: improved (MD - 0·39; 95% CI -0·57 to -0 22); tuberculosis score at 12 weeks: improved (MD - 0·53; 95% CI - 0·84 to - 0·22); TB score at 8 weeks (daily dosing): improved
13 Wang et al. 2025meta-analysis · 18,372 participantsOral vitamin D supplementation; Daily low-dose ≤ 1000 IU/day vs. higher doses; vs. Placebo or no treatmentAll-cause mortality: no difference (RR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.60 to 1.28); Serious adverse events (RR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.71 to 0.96)
14 Liu et al. 2025meta-analysis · 15,677 participantsVitamin D supplementation; vs. PlaceboSerious adverse events (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.76-1.38; p = 0.87)
15 Matukaitienė et al. 2025systematic review · 13,000 participantsVitamin D (level measurement or supplementation); vs. Men with mild vs. moderate-to-severe or arteriogenic ED; supplementation vs. controlSerum vitamin D levels in moderate-to-severe or arteriogenic ED: worsened (significantly lower serum VD levels); Erectile function with low vitamin D status: worsened (poorer erectile function scores); ED prevalence with vitamin D deficiency: worsened (independently associated with higher ED prevalence)
17 Hsu et al. 2026systematic review · 11,600 participantsVitamin D supplements (form not reported); vs. Placebo or control in included RCTsinflammatory markers in obesity/asthma: no difference
18 Patchen et al. 2025systematic review · 10,611 participantsvitamin D (form not specified); 200 IU/day to 100,000 IU bolus quarterly; 28 days to two years; vs. placebo/no supplementation or low/standard dose (≤400 IU/day)early childhood asthma (pregnant/breastfeeding women): improved (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.61; 1 study, 236 participants; low-certainty evidence)

Further studies in this area: 21 22 23 25 26 29 30 32 34 37 38 40 41 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 61 62 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 74 77 78 81 86 87 88 92 93 94 95 98 103 105 110 111 113 114 115 117 118 119 120 124 125 127 129 131 134 135 136 137 138 139 141 142 143 144 145 146 149 150 153 155 157 158 160 161 162 164 165 166 168 169 170 171 172 174 175 176 177 178 180 181 182 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 192 193 194 195 196 197 199 200 201 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 216 217 218 219 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 236 239 240 241 242 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 258 259 260 261 263 264 265 267 268 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 279 281 282 283 284 285 287 288 290 291 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 314 315 317 318 319 322 324 329 332 333 334 338

4. How Is Vitamin D Dosed? Preparation, Dose and Duration in Studies

The studies used predominantly oral preparations with cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) and ergocalciferol (vitamin D2), sometimes calcifediol, as a capsule, tablet, drops or injection. Some studies tested vitamin D together with calcium, vitamin K2, omega-3 fatty acids, magnesium, zinc or probiotics. The doses and intake schedules are shown in the table.

Preparation or formDoseDurationStudy
Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol), 2000 IU/day, vs. placebo2000 IU/daymedian follow-up 5.3 years89
oral vitamin D3, monthly dose60,000 IU monthlymedian 4.6 years follow-up90
Vitamin D3 or placebo60,000 IU per monthup to 5 years91
Vitamin D (2000 IU/day) and/or omega-3 (1 g/day)2000 IU vitamin D daily; 1 g omega-3 dailymedian 5.3 years92
Vitamin D (60,000 IU) or placebo monthly60,000 IU per monthup to 5 years, assessed at 3 years93
Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol)1600 IU/day or 3200 IU/day5 years94
Vitamin D31600 IU/day or 3200 IU/day5 years supplementation, 7.3 years follow-up95
Vitamin D31600 IU/day or 3200 IU/day5 years supplementation, follow-up until end of 202196
oral vitamin D39600 IU/d for 2 d, then 3200 IU/d for 4 wk4 weeks97
Vitamin D3 2000 IU/d, partly combined with omega-3 fatty acids 1 g/d2000 IU vitamin D3 daily; 1 g omega-3 daily5 years98
Vitamin D3 supplement4200, 16,800 or 28,000 IU per weekfrom mid-pregnancy until birth99
Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) and/or marine omega-3 fatty acids vs placebo2000 IU/day vitamin D3; 1 g/day omega-32 years100
Cholecalciferol 1000 IU/day1000 IU dailyfrom 14 weeks' gestation until delivery101
Oral vitamin D (cholecalciferol)4000 or 10,000 IU/day versus 400 IU/dayup to 9 months102
Vitamin D 4000 IU/day or placebo4000 IU/dayup to 90 days until trigger day103

5. Is Vitamin D Safe? Side Effects in Studies

Two meta-analyses found no more adverse events under vitamin D than under placebo, nor more cases of hypercalcemia 1464. One review warns that very high doses can lead to hypercalcemia 21.

StudyReported side effects
8 Migliorini et al. 2025vitamin D associated with fewer gastrointestinal adverse events
11 Meng et al. 2025similar safety profiles between the two groups
13 Wang et al. 2025Fewer serious adverse events, RR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.71 to 0.96
14 Liu et al. 2025Serious adverse events comparable to placebo; none attributed to vitamin D
18 Patchen et al. 2025evidence on adverse events very uncertain
21 Goswami et al. 2025Concern for hypercalcemia at high doses mentioned
24 Jolliffe et al. 2025not reported
26 Zhou et al. 2024Vitamin D among three safest (SUCRA 0.19)
27 Gong et al. 2025similar to control (RR 1.19; 95% CI 0.79 to 1.80)
32 Pilkey et al. 2023safe and well-tolerated
33 Kokkinari et al. 2025not reported
43 Chen et al. 2025adverse events comparable (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94-1.10)

6. What Remains Open: Limits of the Evidence

  • The results depend strongly on form, dose and baseline levels, so it remains unclear which groups and dosages benefit.
  • Many controlled studies were small or short, which limits their informative value.
  • With combination preparations, the contribution of vitamin D alone often cannot be separated out.
  • For cancer diseases, the strength of evidence is low, since the studies are mostly small and concern different tumor types.
  • It remains open whether supplementation alone, without accompanying measures such as training or protein, increases muscle strength.

7. Bottom Line: What Is Established About Vitamin D

In human studies, vitamin D shows a broad spectrum of effects. Controlled studies and meta-analyses found improvements above all in depressive symptoms, disease activity of autoimmune diseases, asthma attacks in children and inflammation markers. Muscle strength mostly increased only together with training. For bones, metabolism, heart and cancer, the results are mixed or predominantly without a difference, for example for blood pressure, falls and cancer incidence. The strength of evidence is overall high, but the results depend strongly on form, dose and population, and many studies were small or short.

Frequently Asked Questions

How well has Vitamin D been studied in humans?

We evaluated 339 human studies on Vitamin D, including 228 randomised controlled trials and 88 meta-analyses or systematic reviews; the controlled studies include 142,839 participants in total. As of 3 October 2026.

Does Vitamin D help with infections and immune system? What the studies show

We evaluated 19 meta-analyses or systematic reviews, 40 controlled studies and 6 further studies; the controlled studies include 7,232 participants in total. Result of the controlled studies: mostly improved. Strength of evidence under our published rules: high. Sources: 291113

Does Vitamin D help with bones, falls and fractures? What the studies show

We evaluated 6 meta-analyses or systematic reviews, 41 controlled studies and 8 further studies; the controlled studies include 11,754 participants in total. Result of the controlled studies: mixed. Strength of evidence under our published rules: high. Sources: 4567

Does Vitamin D help with blood sugar and metabolism? What the studies show

We evaluated 14 meta-analyses or systematic reviews, 31 controlled studies and 6 further studies; the controlled studies include 46,556 participants in total. Result of the controlled studies: mixed. Strength of evidence under our published rules: high. Sources: 17202123

Does Vitamin D help with heart, circulation and blood pressure? What the studies show

We evaluated 11 meta-analyses or systematic reviews, 30 controlled studies and 3 further studies; the controlled studies include 26,146 participants in total. Result of the controlled studies: mostly no difference. Strength of evidence under our published rules: high. Sources: 132132

Does Vitamin D help with mood and depression? What the studies show

We evaluated 5 meta-analyses or systematic reviews and 17 controlled studies; the controlled studies include 4,067 participants in total. Result of the controlled studies: mostly improved. Strength of evidence under our published rules: high. Sources: 12325174

Does Vitamin D help with pregnancy and children? What the studies show

We evaluated 5 meta-analyses or systematic reviews, 10 controlled studies and 5 further studies; the controlled studies include 5,476 participants in total. Result of the controlled studies: mixed. Strength of evidence under our published rules: high. Sources: 17193376

Which forms of vitamin D were investigated in the studies?

The studies used predominantly oral preparations with cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) and ergocalciferol (vitamin D2), sometimes calcifediol. Some studies tested vitamin D together with calcium, vitamin K2, omega-3 fatty acids, magnesium, zinc or probiotics. The exact doses and forms are shown in the table.

Do human studies show an effect on the immune system?

For COVID-19, mortality under vitamin D was lower in two meta-analyses and one controlled study, but not robust in one meta-analysis 3153225. In children with asthma, severe attacks decreased 46191, but overall vitamin D did not prevent respiratory infections in children 1324134.

What do studies show about bones and falls?

Children whose mothers received cholecalciferol during pregnancy had higher bone density at primary school age than after placebo 116. In children and young adults with HIV, a relatively high daily dose improved bone density in a meta-analysis 50. For falls in independently living older people, one meta-analysis and two controlled studies found no difference 1094145. Three meta-analyses, by contrast, found fewer falls, depending on dose, daily administration and baseline levels 456. Fewer bone fractures appeared in one meta-analysis only when vitamin D was given together with calcium 6.

How safe is vitamin D?

Two meta-analyses found no more adverse events under vitamin D than under placebo, nor more cases of hypercalcemia 1464. One review warns that very high doses can lead to hypercalcemia 21. In one study, kidney stones occurred in some of the participants, without a clear difference between the groups 98.

Are there limitations of the studies?

The results depend strongly on form, dose and baseline levels, so it remains unclear which groups and dosages benefit. Many controlled studies were small or short. With combination preparations, the contribution of vitamin D alone often cannot be separated out. For cancer diseases, the strength of evidence is low.

Sources

  1. 1
    An P, Wan S, Luo Y, Luo J, Zhang X, Zhou S et al. · 2022
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
    Wei FL, Li T, Gao QY, Huang Y, Zhou CP, Wang W et al. · 2022
  5. 5
  6. 6
    Thanapluetiwong S, Chewcharat A, Takkavatakarn K, Praditpornsilpa K, Eiam-Ong S, Susantitaphong P · 2020
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. 15
    Matukaitienė R, Pikelytė A, Žilaitienė B, Lažauskas R, Verkauskienė R, Čeponis J · 2025
  16. 16
  17. 17
  18. 18
    Patchen BK, Best CM, Boiteau J, Solvik BS, Vonderschmidt A, Xu J et al. · 2025
  19. 19
  20. 20
  21. 21
  22. 22
  23. 23
  24. 24
  25. 25
  26. 26
  27. 27
  28. 28
  29. 29
  30. 30
    Paraskevas T, Kotrokois K, Vassilakou T, Halvatsiotis P, Psaltopoulou T, Sarafis P et al. · 2025
  31. 31
  32. 32
  33. 33
    Kokkinari A, Antoniou E, Orovou E, Andronikidi PE, Tzitiridou-Chatzopoulou M, Sarantaki A et al. · 2025
  34. 34
  35. 35
  36. 36
  37. 37
  38. 38
  39. 39
  40. 40
  41. 41
  42. 42
  43. 43
  44. 44
    Zeb F, Osaili T, Hashim M, Alkalbani N, Papandreou D, Cheikh Ismail L et al. · 2026
  45. 45
  46. 46
  47. 47
  48. 48
  49. 49
    Zhang Y, Yu S, Zu Y, Lv J, Chen J, Feng X · 2025
  50. 50
  51. 51
  52. 52
  53. 53
  54. 54
  55. 55
  56. 56
  57. 57
  58. 58
  59. 59
  60. 60
  61. 61
  62. 62
  63. 63
  64. 64
  65. 65
  66. 66
    Wu X, Zeng J, Ye X, Peng M, Lan Y, Zhang S et al. · 2025
  67. 67
  68. 68
  69. 69
  70. 70
  71. 71
  72. 72
    González-Parejo P, Martín-Núñez J, Cabrera-Martos I, Valenza MC · 2024
  73. 73
  74. 74
  75. 75
    da Rocha AP, Atallah AN, Aldrighi JM, Pires ALR, Dos Santos Puga ME, Pinto ACPN · 2021
  76. 76
  77. 77
  78. 78
  79. 79
    Alimohammadi-Kamalabadi M, Ziaei S, Hasani M, Mohammadi S, Mehrbod M, Morvaridi M et al. · 2024
  80. 80
    Alber CS, Halsey J, Emberson J, Hin H, Hill M, Armitage J et al. · 2026
  81. 81
    Formisano E, Proietti E, Borgarelli C, Pisciotta L · 2023
  82. 82
  83. 83
    Massé O, Mercurio CM, Dupuis S, Al Sahwi M, Arruda A, Dallaire G et al. · 2026
  84. 84
  85. 85
  86. 86
    Ruiz-García A, Pallarés-Carratalá V, Turégano-Yedro M, Torres F, Sapena V, Martin-Gorgojo A et al. · 2023
  87. 87
  88. 88
  89. 89
  90. 90
  91. 91
  92. 92
  93. 93
  94. 94
  95. 95
  96. 96
    Ahl NM, Hantunen S, Tuomainen TP, Lamberg-Allardt C, Manson JE, Nurmi T et al. · 2026
  97. 97
    Ganmaa D, Cook KA, Khudyakov P, Enkhjargal D, Bilegtsaikhan T, Mayer KH et al. · 2026
  98. 98
  99. 99
  100. 100
  101. 101
  102. 102
  103. 103
  104. 104
  105. 105
  106. 106
  107. 107
  108. 108
  109. 109
  110. 110
    Tran V, Duarte Romero BL, Andersen H, Clarke M, Collins LG, Dawson T et al. · 2025
  111. 111
  112. 112
  113. 113
    Gkanis V, Nastos K, Ntalaperas K, Agianni E, Lainas S, Raikou P et al. · 2026
  114. 114
  115. 115
  116. 116
  117. 117
  118. 118
  119. 119
  120. 120
    Sprague SM, Crawford PW, Melnick JZ, Strugnell SA, Ali S, Mangoo-Karim R et al. · 2016
  121. 121
  122. 122
  123. 123
  124. 124
  125. 125
    Pérez Castrillón JL, Jódar-Gimeno E, Molina K, García-Bea A, Ostalé CM, Gilaberte I · 2025
  126. 126
  127. 127
    Jódar-Gimeno E, Pérez-Castrillón JL, Nociar J, Lojka M, Nikolov D, Cereto-Castro F et al. · 2024
  128. 128
  129. 129
    Diederichsen ACP, Lindholt JS, Möller S, Øvrehus KA, Auscher S, Lambrechtsen J et al. · 2022
  130. 130
  131. 131
    Alonso N, Schoenmakers I, Kuenzer T, Willems A, Jin H, Aspray TJ et al. · 2026
  132. 132
    Thouvenot E, Laplaud D, Lebrun-Frenay C, Derache N, Le Page E, Maillart E et al. · 2025
  133. 133
  134. 134
  135. 135
    Pérez-Castrillón JL, Dueñas-Laita A, Gómez-Alonso C, Jódar E, Del Pino-Montes J, Brandi ML et al. · 2023
  136. 136
    Yahyavi SK, Probst-Drejer B, Poulsen NN, Jorsal MJ, Juul A, Jørgensen N et al. · 2026
  137. 137
    Pérez-Castrillón JL, Dueñas-Laita A, Brandi ML, Jódar E, Del Pino-Montes J, Quesada-Gómez JM et al. · 2021
  138. 138
  139. 139
    Morrone L, Palmer SC, Saglimbene VM, Perna A, Cianciolo G, Russo D et al. · 2022
  140. 140
  141. 141
  142. 142
    Pérez-Castrillón JL, Jódar-Gimeno E, Nociar J, Lojka M, Nikolov D, Cereto-Castro F et al. · 2025
  143. 143
    Miskulin DC, Majchrzak K, Tighiouart H, Muther RS, Kapoian T, Johnson DS et al. · 2016
  144. 144
  145. 145
    Aloia JF, Rubinova R, Fazzari M, Islam S, Mikhail M, Ragolia L · 2019
  146. 146
    Minopoli A, Di Gennaro P, Porciello G, Palumbo E, Vitale S, Grimaldi M et al. · 2025
  147. 147
  148. 148
  149. 149
  150. 150
  151. 151
    Alekel DL, Van Loan MD, Koehler KJ, Hanson LN, Stewart JW, Hanson KB et al. · 2010
  152. 152
  153. 153
    Flores-Aldana M, Rivera-Pasquel M, García-Guerra A, Pérez-Cortés JG, Bárcena-Echegollén JE · 2023
  154. 154
  155. 155
  156. 156
  157. 157
  158. 158
  159. 159
  160. 160
    Zelzer S, Meinitzer A, Enko D, Keppel MH, Herrmann M, Theiler-Schwetz V et al. · 2024
  161. 161
  162. 162
    Schlögl M, Chocano-Bedoya P, Dawson-Hughes B, Orav EJ, Freystaetter G, Theiler R et al. · 2019
  163. 163
  164. 164
    CAN PROTEIN AND VITAMIN D ENHANCE THE COGNITIVE BENEFITS OF RESISTANCE TRAINING IN TYPE 2 DIABETICS?
    Macpherson H, Miller E, Dunstan D, Nowson C, Kerr D, Menzies D et al. · 2017
  165. 165
  166. 166
  167. 167
  168. 168
  169. 169
    Bishop CW, Ashfaq A, Melnick JZ, Vazquez-Escarpanter E, Fialkow JA, Strugnell SA et al. · 2023
  170. 170
    Bashiri FA, Hudairi A, Hamad MH, Al-Sulimani LK, Al Homyani D, Al Saqabi D et al. · 2024
  171. 171
    Bishop CW, Ashfaq A, Melnick JZ, Vazquez-Escarpanter E, Fialkow JA, Strugnell SA et al. · 2022
  172. 172
  173. 173
    Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Dawson-Hughes B, Orav JE, Ceglia L, Egli A, Kistler-Fischbacher M et al. · 2025
  174. 174
    Tannous P, Fiscaletti M, Wood N, Gunasekera H, Zurynski Y, Biggin A et al. · 2020
  175. 175
  176. 176
    Midttun M, Overgaard K, Zerahn B, Pedersen M, Rashid A, Østergren PB et al. · 2024
  177. 177
  178. 178
    Bataille S, Seret G, Lavainne F, Giaime P, Serveaux M, Robert T et al. · 2026
  179. 179
  180. 180
  181. 181
  182. 182
  183. 183
    Vafaei H, Asadi N, Kasraeian M, Shahraki HR, Bazrafshan K, Namazi N · 2019
  184. 184
  185. 185
  186. 186
  187. 187
  188. 188
  189. 189
  190. 190
    Suardi D, Judistiani RTD, Rinaldi M, Trianasari N, Hidayat B, Lesmana R et al. · 2025
  191. 191
  192. 192
  193. 193
  194. 194
  195. 195
  196. 196
    Popko-Zagor M, Jandziak P, Sierdzinski J, Rusetska N, Sarnowska E · 2025
  197. 197
  198. 198
  199. 199
    Andújar-Espinosa R, Salinero-González L, Illán-Gómez F, Castilla-Martínez M, Hu-Yang C, Ruiz-López FJ · 2021
  200. 200
  201. 201
  202. 202
  203. 203
  204. 204
    Bhan I, Dobens D, Tamez H, Deferio JJ, Li YC, Warren HS et al. · 2015
  205. 205
  206. 206
  207. 207
  208. 208
  209. 209
  210. 210
  211. 211
  212. 212
    Rafii DC, Ali F, Farag A, Iyer B, Otterbeck PE, Chaudhari R et al. · 2019
  213. 213
    Jalili M, Hekmatdoost A, Vahedi H, Poustchi H, Khademi B, Saadi M et al. · 2016
  214. 214
  215. 215
  216. 216
    Samaranayake DBDL, Adikaram SGS, Atapattu N, Kendaragama KMDLD, Senevirathne JTN, Jayasekera HD et al. · 2020
  217. 217
  218. 218
    Effects of 12-Week Multivitamin Supplementation on Serum Folate Levels in Pre-Menopausal Females
    Osburn S, Roberson P, Medler J, Shake J, Arnold R, Alamdari N et al. · 2020
  219. 219
    Tuñón J, Rodríguez-López C, Balaguer J, Gómez-Talavera S, Rojas A, Salamanca J et al. · 2026
  220. 220
  221. 221
  222. 222
  223. 223
  224. 224
  225. 225
  226. 226
  227. 227
  228. 228
  229. 229
  230. 230
  231. 231
    Omodei MS, Chimicoviaki J, Buttros DAB, Almeida-Filho BS, Carvalho-Pessoa CP, Carvalho-Pessoa E et al. · 2025
  232. 232
  233. 233
  234. 234
  235. 235
  236. 236
  237. 237
  238. 238
  239. 239
  240. 240
  241. 241
  242. 242
  243. 243
  244. 244
  245. 245
  246. 246
  247. 247
    Shabani F, Hajizadeh K, Hesami M, Shaseb E, Rahmani V, Nasirkandy MP et al. · 2026
  248. 248
  249. 249
  250. 250
  251. 251
  252. 252
  253. 253
  254. 254
  255. 255
  256. 256
  257. 257
    Rodríguez-Morán M, Guerrero-Romero F, Barragán-Zuñiga J, Gamboa-Gómez CI, Weyman-Vela Y, Arce-Quiñones M et al. · 2024
  258. 258
  259. 259
  260. 260
    Kirsch SH, Herrmann W, Kruse V, Eckert R, Gräber S, Geisel J et al. · 2015
  261. 261
  262. 262
  263. 263
  264. 264
  265. 265
  266. 266
    Fernández Dorado MT, Díaz Merino MDS, García Marco D, Cuena Boy R, Blanco Samper B, Martínez Dhier L et al. · 2022
  267. 267
  268. 268
    Cuadra-Llopart L, Salvà Casanovas A, Cerdà Mas G, Jovell-Fernández E · 2026
  269. 269
  270. 270
  271. 271
  272. 272
  273. 273
  274. 274
  275. 275
  276. 276
  277. 277
  278. 278
    Aguayo-Ruiz JI, García-Cobián TA, Pascoe-González S, Sánchez-Enríquez S, Llamas-Covarrubias IM, García-Iglesias T et al. · 2020
  279. 279
  280. 280
    Nwosu BU, Parajuli S, Jasmin G, Fleshman J, Sharma RB, Alonso LC et al. · 2022
  281. 281
  282. 282
  283. 283
    Parhiala M, Aronen A, Ukkonen M, Haukijärvi E, Pappinen P, Rinta-Kiikka I et al. · 2026
  284. 284
  285. 285
  286. 286
  287. 287
    Rivero-Yeverino D, Payan-Diaz JH, López-García AI, Papaqui-Tapia JS, Caballero-López CG, Ríos-López JJ et al. · 2024
  288. 288
  289. 289
  290. 290
  291. 291
  292. 292
  293. 293
    Seppälä V, Holmlund-Suila E, Hauta-Alus H, Sandboge S, Kajantie E, Rosendahl J et al. · 2026
  294. 294
    Seppälä V, Sandboge S, Holmlund-Suila E, Hauta-Alus H, Lintula S, Kajantie E et al. · 2026
  295. 295
  296. 296
  297. 297
  298. 298
  299. 299
  300. 300
  301. 301
  302. 302
  303. 303
  304. 304
  305. 305
  306. 306
  307. 307
    Amphansap T, Therdyothin A, Stitkitti N, Nitiwarangkul L, Phiphobmongkol V · 2022
  308. 308
    Vichutavate S, Suwanpakdee P, Likasitthananon N, Numbenjapon N, Nabangchang C, Phatarakijnirund V · 2022
  309. 309
  310. 310
  311. 311
  312. 312
    Dalla Via J, Owen PJ, Daly RM, Mundell NL, Livingston PM, Rantalainen T et al. · 2021
  313. 313
    Borgi L, McMullan C, Wohlhueter A, Curhan GC, Fisher ND, Forman JP · 2017
  314. 314
    Small BJ, Rawson KS, Martin C, Eisel SL, Sanberg CD, McEvoy CL et al. · 2014
  315. 315
    García-Martín A, Quesada Charneco M, Alvárez Guisado A, Jiménez Moleón JJ, Fonollá Joya J, Muñoz-Torres M · 2012
  316. 316
  317. 317
  318. 318
    Bhandari R, Aguayo-Hiraldo P, Malvar J, Cheng K, Sacapano A, Abdel-Azim H et al. · 2021
  319. 319
  320. 320
  321. 321
  322. 322
    Moutzouri E, Beglinger S, Feller M, Eichenberger A, Dalleur O, Knol W et al. · 2025
  323. 323
  324. 324
  325. 325
  326. 326
    Alcala-Diaz JF, Limia-Perez L, Gomez-Huelgas R, Martin-Escalante MD, Cortes-Rodriguez B, Zambrana-Garcia JL et al. · 2021
  327. 327
  328. 328
  329. 329
    Kobayashi H, Amrein K, Mahmoud SH, Lasky-Su JA, Christopher KB · 2024
  330. 330
  331. 331
  332. 332
    Fadda G, Germain MJ, Broumand V, Nguyen A, McGarvey N, Gitlin M et al. · 2021
  333. 333
    Galus W, Winder M, Owczarek AJ, Walawska-Hrycek A, Rzepka M, Kaczmarczyk A et al. · 2025
  334. 334
    Khajedaluee AR, Rajati M, Tabatabaei D, Jafarzadeh S, Tabesh H, Afzalzadeh MR et al. · 2026
  335. 335
  336. 336
  337. 337
  338. 338
    Saric L, Domazet Bugarin J, Dosenovic S · 2024
  339. 339

Every statement on this page carries its evidence tier — proven, plausible or hypothesis — and leads to the original work. The decision in the individual case rests with the practitioner; we provide the connections.

International Health Research · https://ih-research.com/en/knowledge/vitamin-d/ · Last updated: 2026-10-15