Vitamin D measurement standardization: The way out of the chaos.

Substantial variability is associated with laboratory measurement of serum total 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D]. The resulting chaos impedes development of consensus 25(OH)D values to define stages of vitamin D status. As resolving this situation requires standardized measurement of 25(OH)D, the Vitamin D Standardization Program (VDSP) developed methodology to standardize 25(OH)D measurement to the gold standard reference measurement procedures of NIST, Ghent University and CDC. Importantly, VDSP developed protocols for standardizing 25(OH)D values from prior research based on availability of stored serum samples. The effect of such retrospective standardization on prevalence of "low" vitamin D status in national studies reported here for The Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III, 1988-1994) and the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KIGGS, 2003-2006) was such that in NHANES III 25(OH)D values were lower than original values while higher in KIGGS. In NHANES III the percentage with values below 30, 50 and 75 nmol/L increased from 4% to 6%, 22% to 31% and 55% to 71%, respectively. Whereas in KIGGS after standardization the percentage below 30, 50, and 70 nmol/L decreased from 28% to 13%, 64% to 47% and 87% to 85% respectively. Moreover, in a hypothetical example, depending on whether the 25(OH)D assay was positively or negatively biased by 12%, the 25(OH)D concentration which maximally suppressed PTH could vary from 20 to 35ng/mL. These examples underscore the challenges (perhaps impossibility) of developing vitamin D guidelines using unstandardized 25(OH)D data. Retrospective 25(OH)D standardization can be applied to old studies where stored serum samples exist. As a way forward, we suggest an international effort to identify key prior studies with stored samples for re-analysis and standardization initially to define the 25(OH)D level associated with vitamin D deficiency (rickets/osteomalacia). Subsequent work could focus on defining inadequacy. Finally, examples reported here highlight the importance of suspending publication of meta-analyses based on unstandardized 25(OH)D results.

Developing vitamin D dietary guidelines and the lack of 25-hydroxyvitamin D assay standardization: The ever-present past.

Unstandardized laboratory measurement of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) confounds efforts to develop clinical and public health vitamin D guidelines. The Vitamin D Standardization Program (VDSP), an international collaborative effort, was founded in 2010 to correct this problem. Nearly all published vitamin D research is based on unstandardized laboratory 25(OH)D measurements. While it is impossible to standardize all old data, it may be possible to identify a small subset of prior studies critical to guidelines development. Once identified it may be possible to calibrate their 25(OH)D values to the NIST and Ghent University reference measurement procedures using VDSP methods thereby permitting future guidelines to be based on standardized results. We simulated the calibration of a small set of ten clinical trials of vitamin D supplementation on achieved 25(OH)D under minimal sun exposure. These studies were selected because they played a prominent role in setting the 2010 vitamin D dietary reference intakes (DRI). Using random-effects meta-regression analysis, Vitamin D External Quality Assessment (DEQAS) data on assay bias was used to simulate the potential bias due to the lack of assay standardization by calibrating the achieved 25(OH)D levels from those 10 studies to: (1) the largest negative, and (2) the largest positive bias from the DEQAS all laboratory trimmed mean (ALTM) for the appropriate assay and year of analysis. For a usual vitamin D intake of 600IU/day the difference in mean achieved 25(OH)D values for those two options was 20nmol/L. However, without re-calibration of 25(OH)D values it is impossible to know the degree to which any of the current guidelines may have been biased. This approach may help stimulate the search for and standardization of that small subset of key studies and, in the cases where standardization is impossible, to identify areas of urgently needed vitamin D research.

Assessing beliefs of older rural Americans about nutrition education: use of the focus group approach.

We used the focus group interview technique as a preliminary research step in developing a nutrition education intervention for rural seniors who, because of less than optimal eating habits and changing demographics, are an important target audience. Sixty-eight well, active, rural North Dakota seniors, 60 years or older, from communities of 2,500 or fewer people, participated in five focus groups conducted in late summer 1988. As a qualitative research approach, focus group interviews offer a means of obtaining in-depth information on a specific topic from representatives of a target audience in a discussion group atmosphere. Focus groups require careful preparation and structuring and should include a capable moderator, a prepared discussion guide, carefully recruited participants, and a comfortable setting. The process generated ideas that we are using to develop a health promotion nutrition intervention that will be a mailed-home approach, including use of incentives, social role models, cholesterol screening, and learning activities. The intervention relies on the interest and ability of seniors to make positive health changes. We conclude that the focus group approach is useful in developing nutrition education interventions.

Focus group interviews with seniors.

The focus group interview technique provides in-depth information on a specific topic in a group discussion setting and can be effectively used with older adults. Successful focus group interviews include careful question preparation and participant recruitment as well as securing a capable moderator and comfortable setting. The technique is used as a preliminary research step to elicit feelings, attitudes and perceptions about a topic. However, results should not be generalized without further quantitative research.