As I’m sure most all of our readers and members know, there is a big debate in vitamin D right now. Some researchers think that we need more research before we can raise vitamin D recommendations. Other researchers believe that there is enough research right now to raise vitamin D recommendations. The Vitamin D Council is in the latter camp. We believe that unless research proves otherwise, people need the same vitamin D levels of outdoor living peoples, which is nearly double the American mean level.
A term information scientists and researchers use for this kind of debate in research is uncertainty. Information scientists would say there is uncertainty in vitamin D research, particularly because we haven’t reached an apex of knowledge about vitamin D. Research in vitamin D is still building.
This uncertainty and debate in vitamin D leads to much confusion in medical literature and in the media. In consequence, this uncertainty trickles down to health care providers and patients, and can cause uncertainty and inconsistency between patients and providers.
Recently, researchers surveyed primary care providers and patients. They wanted to know what they knew and thought about vitamin D and how that was affecting their relationship between the two. They wanted to know how much uncertainty about vitamin D clouted providers and patients.
If themes emerged, this could help both educators like the Vitamin D Council and providers, to help them better understand their patients.
Researchers recruited 7 primary health care providers and 89 community members from different regions throughout Kentucky. The healthcare providers underwent semi-structured interviews focused on vitamin D. The community members were put into 6 focus groups where they participated in open-ended discussions that all began with the question, “What have you heard about vitamin D?”
Among the primary care providers, the three most common themes were:
Among the focus groups, the three most common themes were:
The researchers only included 7 health care providers, meaning their responses cannot be generalized to all health care providers. Additionally, the researchers note that the community members were not matched to their own providers but were instead meant to represent a typical patient. Finally, most of the community members who participated were well-educated women, which means that their responses may not represent other populations.
The researchers noted that most patients’ goal is to adapt and cope with uncertainty in health care and that provider’s underestimate their patient’s willingness to learn about the uncertainty.
The Vitamin D Council works hard to present this vitamin D debate and uncertainty for similar reasons. We believe that if we present the debate and both sides to the argument as best we can on a consistent basis, the public will feel more comfortable with vitamin D and develop a better understanding of how they want to incorporate vitamin D in their health.
Future public health strategies and research should be targeted at providing adequate vitamin D information and helping to establish effective vitamin D practices in patient-provider communication.