What does the evidence say about Calcium Fracture Prevention Meta-Analysis?

The current Migaku evidence database contains 2 reusable source documents for Calcium Fracture Prevention Meta-Analysis. This answer focuses on benefits, uncertainty, and practical interpretation. - Secondary outcomes included the risk of hip fracture, non-vertebral fracture, vertebral fracture, and falling, as well as the total number of falls. [Massé O (2026); evidence level 1] - Pairs of reviewers independently screened trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the second version of Cochrane's risk of bias tool. [Massé O (2026); evidence level 1] - Participants in most of the trials were community dwelling (87%) and not at high risk of fractures or falls (73%). [Massé O (2026); evidence level 1] - Objective To assess the effect of calcium, vitamin D, or combined supplementation on fractures and falls in adults. [Massé O (2026); evidence level 1] - Supported by this biological plausibility and by observational studies demonstrating a robust inverse association between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels and the risk of fractures and falls, the medical community has witnessed a global surge in vitamin D screening and empiric supplementation over the past two decades []. [Kong Sung Hye (2026); evidence level 3] Evidence levels are sorting aids, not final clinical grades. Level 1 usually indicates systematic-review style evidence, level 2 indicates randomized trials or public-health guidance, and lower levels need more cautious wording. This page is educational. People with medical conditions, pregnancy, medication use, or unusual symptoms should ask a qualified clinician before changing supplements, medication, or treatment routines.