IOM committee members respond to endocrine society vitamin D guideline: Editorial Comment

摘要

The recent publication of the Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline, "Evaluation, Treatment, and Prevention of Vitamin D Deficiency," has generated considerable controversy. Although there are some agreements in this new guideline with the Institute of Medicine (IOM) Committee's 2011 "Report on Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D," there are substantial differences between these 2 guidelines. These disagreements on several important issues generate confusion for clinicians, researchers, and the public. In this commentary, members of the IOM committee address a number of conclusions in the Endocrine Society guideline that are not supported by adequate evidence and are in need of reconsideration.Disagreements of the Committee with The Endocrine Society guideline relate to whether targeted serum 25OHD levels are different for the general and at-risk populations, on how vitamin D deficiency should be defined, and on who constitutes a population at risk versus the general population.