Open AccessIOM Committee Members Respond to Endocrine Society Vitamin D Guideline
Author(s) -
Clifford J. Rosen,
Steven A. Abrams,
John F. Aloia,
Patsy M. Bran,
Steven K. Clinton,
Ramón Durazo-Arvizú,
John C. Gallagher,
Richard L. Gallo,
Glenville Jones,
Christopher S. Kovacs,
JoAnn E. Manson,
Susan T. Mayne,
A. Catharine Ross,
Sue A. Shapses,
Christine L. Taylor
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
the journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.206
H-Index - 353
eISSN - 1945-7197
pISSN - 0021-972X
DOI - 10.1210/jc.2011-2218
Subject(s) - guideline , confusion , medicine , endocrine system , vitamin d deficiency , vitamin d and neurology , population , family medicine , endocrinology , psychology , environmental health , pathology , hormone , psychoanalysis
In early 2011, a committee convened by the Institute of Medicine issued a report on the Dietary Reference Intakes for calcium and vitamin D. The Endocrine Society Task Force in July 2011 published a guideline for the evaluation, treatment, and prevention of vitamin D deficiency. Although these reports are intended for different purposes, the disagreements concerning the nature of the available data and the resulting conclusions have caused confusion for clinicians, researchers, and the public. In this commentary, members of the Institute of Medicine committee respond to aspects of The Endocrine Society guideline that are not well supported and in need of reconsideration. These concerns focus on target serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels, the definition of vitamin D deficiency, and the question of who constitutes a population at risk vs. the general population.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom