NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc0
ObjectivesTo explore if short term, high dose vitamin D supplementation is safe and improves balance in persons with Parkinson's disease (PD).MethodsA pilot randomized, double-blind intervention trial to measure the effects of 16 weeks of high dose vitamin D (10,000 IU/day) on balance as well as other motor and non-motor features of PD. We measured balance, gait, strength, falls, cognition, mood, PD severity, and quality of life before and after 16 weeks of high dose vitamin D supplementation or placebo. All participants also received 1000 mg calcium once daily.ResultsFifty-one randomized participants completed sixteen weeks of high dose vitamin D supplementation or placebo. The intervention resulted in a rise in serum concentrations of vitamin D (25-OH) (30.2 ng/ml to 61.1 ng/ml) and was well tolerated with no serious adverse events. Serum vitamin D (25-OH) levels rose steadily and did not suggest a leveling off at the end of the 16 weeks. There was not an improvement in the primary endpoint, balance as measured by the Sensory Organization Test (p = 0.43). A post hoc analysis examining treatment effects in younger (ages 52-66) versus older (ages 67-86) participants found a significant improvement in the SOT of 10.6 points in the younger half of the cohort (p = 0.012).ConclusionsShort term, high dose vitamin D supplementation appears safe in persons with PD, but did not significantly improve balance as measured with the Sensory Organization Test in this pilot study population. A post hoc analysis suggests that vitamin D may have potential for improving balance in a younger population with PD. High dose vitamin D supplementation in PD needs further study especially in light of new research suggesting that mega doses and even moderate doses (as low as 4000IU a day) may increase falls in an older populations.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01119131.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.