High-dose vitamin D supplementation in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pneumonia hospitalized in a polyvalent intensive care unit: A retrospective cohort study

Vasconcelos et al., Nutrition in Clinical Practice, doi:10.1002/ncp.11277, Feb 2025
ICU patientsRetrospective · 126 patients · Portugal · Apr – Oct 2020
Vitamin D for COVID-19
Vasconcelos et al. Nutrition in Clinical Practice · February 2025
Outcome
Improvement
Relative Risk · 95% CI
Mortality, 60 days after discharge
73%0.27 · 0.07–0.71
Mortality, in hospital
67%0.33 · 0.10–0.85
Mortality, in ICU
87%0.13 · 0.03–0.49
00.511.52+
← Vitamin D
reduces riskVitamin D
increases risk →
Lower mortality with vitamin D
p = 0.023

Vitamin D for COVID-19

8th treatment shown to reduce risk in October 2020, now with p < 0.0000000001 from 138 studies, recognized in 18 countries.
Lower risk for mortality, ICU, hospitalization, progression, recovery, cases, and viral clearance.

No treatment is 100% effective.
Protocols combine treatments.

6,700+ studies · 220+ treatments

c19early.org
Meta-analysis
Retrospective ICU patients in Portugal, showing significantly lower mortality with vitamin D treatment.
This is the 133rd of 138 COVID-19 controlled studies for vitamin D, which collectively show efficacy with p<0.0000000001.
41 studies are RCTs, which show efficacy with p=0.00000049.
Standard of Care (SOC) for COVID-19 in the study country, Portugal, is very poor with very low average efficacy for approved treatments1. Only expensive, high-profit treatments were approved for early treatment. Low-cost treatments were excluded, reducing the probability of early treatment due to access and cost barriers, and eliminating complementary and synergistic benefits seen with many low-cost treatments. This may explain in part the very high mortality seen in this study. Results may differ in countries with improved SOC.
Important missing comments or errors? Let us know.
risk of death, 73.2% lower, RR 0.27, p = 0.02, treatment 9 of 72 (12.5%), control 18 of 54 (33.3%), NNT 4.8, adjusted per study, odds ratio converted to relative risk, 60 days after discharge, multivariable.
risk of death, 66.7% lower, RR 0.33, p = 0.04, treatment 9 of 72 (12.5%), control 16 of 54 (29.6%), NNT 5.8, adjusted per study, odds ratio converted to relative risk, in hospital, multivariable.
risk of death, 86.9% lower, RR 0.13, p = 0.006, treatment 3 of 72 (4.2%), control 13 of 54 (24.1%), NNT 5.0, adjusted per study, odds ratio converted to relative risk, in ICU, multivariable.
Effect extraction follows pre-specified rules prioritizing more serious outcomes. Submit updates
Vasconcelos et al., 19 Feb 2025, retrospective, Portugal, peer-reviewed, 3 authors, study period 14 April, 2020 - 31 October, 2020, dosage 125,000IU days 1-2.
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19 treatment protocols c19early.org October 2026 Portugal Angola Colombia Kenya Mozambique Myanmar South Africa Peru Philippines Vietnam Japan Argentina Nepal Iran Bangladesh Ethiopia Ghana Germany Mexico South Korea United Kingdom Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland Uzbekistan India China Venezuela DR Congo Madagascar Thailand Uganda Egypt Nigeria Taiwan Fiji Zambia Bosnia-Herzegovina Jordan Georgia Switzerland Dominican Republic Bolivia Côte d'Ivoire Eritrea Togo Bulgaria Greece Slovakia Iceland New Zealand Trinidad and Tobago Mongolia Czechia Belarus Israel Haiti North Macedonia Hong Kong Qatar Panama Serbia Portugal favored high-profit treatments.The average efficacy of treatments was very low.High-cost protocols reduce early treatment, andforgo complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19treatment protocols worldwide c19early.org October 2026 Portugal Angola Colombia Kenya Mozambique Myanmar South Africa Peru Philippines Vietnam Japan Argentina Nepal Iran Bangladesh Ethiopia Ghana Germany Mexico South Korea United Kingdom Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland Uzbekistan India China Venezuela DR Congo Madagascar Thailand Uganda Egypt Fiji Zambia Jordan Georgia Switzerland Dominican Rep. Bolivia Côte d'Ivoire Eritrea Togo Sri Lanka Bulgaria Greece Slovakia New Zealand Trinidad and Tobago Mongolia Czechia Belarus Israel North Macedonia Hong Kong Qatar Panama Serbia Portugal favored high-profit treatments.The average efficacy was very low.High-cost protocols reduce early treatment,and forgo complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
Late treatment
is less effective
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments. c19early involves the extraction of 200,000+ datapoints from thousands of papers. Community updates help ensure high accuracy. Treatments and other interventions are complementary. All practical, effective, and safe means should be used based on risk/benefit analysis. No treatment or intervention is 100% available and effective for all current and future variants. We do not provide medical advice. Before taking any medication, consult a qualified physician who can provide personalized advice and details of risks and benefits based on your medical history and situation. IMA and WCH provide treatment protocols.
  or use drag and drop   
Submit    
Post
Share
@CovidAnalysis
FAQ
Public domain CC0 1.0