Our systematic search retrieved 2998 study articles from different databases by using the search strategy elaborated earlier. Among these 2998 articles, 2933 were excluded because of being unable to fully fill our inclusion criteria. Finally, 65 study articles were selected. Study article selection process is shown in (Figure 1).
Out of 65 studies, 26 studies did not mention the demographic area for the study of the population. The remaining studies included it, where 3 studies were conducted on the rural population, 25 studies on the urban population, and 11 studies were conducted on both rural and urban population. More than half of the studies were hospital based (35 out of 65) and rest of them were community based. Socio economic status for the study population was not mentioned in majority of the studies (42 out of 65). For socio economic groups of the population, 5 studies were conducted on lower economic groups and a single study was conducted on the upper and middle-income groups of the population. The rest of them were conducted on a mixed population which represents the lower, middle and upper economic groups of the population. Maximum number of study designs were cross sectional (55 out of 65) and the rest of them were either case control or randomized control trials. Several kinds of measurement methods were used to determine vitamin D status like ELISA (Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay) RIA (Radioimmunoassay), Chemiluminescent Immunoassay (CLIA), Chemiluminescence micro particle Immunoassay (CLMA), HPLC (High performance liquid chromatography), Electro chemiluminescent immunoassay etc. Among these RIA and ELISA were mostly used (33out of 65). Only four studies did not mention the method of vitamin D estimation [79, 81, 84, 85]. A Summary outlining the characteristics of selected articles is presented in (Table 1).
The total population size of the studies finally selected was 44,717; which included both men and women. Participants were 18 years or above for maximum number of the studies. However, seven studies included adult participants whose age range started from below 18 years [42, 69, 70, 72, 74, 83, 84].
Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and average level of vitamin D was mentioned in all studies. Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency ranged from 17% to 99% and the average vitamin D level ranged from 4.7 ng/mL to 32 ng/mL. The overall pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was 68% [95% CI: 64% to 72%] and the weighted mean level and weighted standard deviation (weighted SD) of vitamin D was 19.15 ng/mL and 11.59 ng/mL respectively.
There was a significant amount of heterogeneity in the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency (I2 = 98.46%; p = 0.00). Forest plot shows overall prevalence of vitamin D deficiency (Figure 2).
Approximately 95% (62 out of 65) of our selected studies were conducted on the population of the Indian sub-continent (Bangladesh, India and Pakistan). Bar diagram (Additional file; Figure: A1) showed that weighted mean level of vitamin D was less than 20 ng/mL for this region.
Analysis according to country:
The study encompassed 5 out of 8 SA countries which included Bangladesh, India, Pakistan Nepal and Sri Lanka. No studies were found from Bhutan, Afghanistan and Maldives regarding vitamin D status. A forest plot displays country wise prevalence of vitamin D deficiency (Figure-3).
India:
We found 39 studies from India which consisted of 38,672 participants. Mostly, these were cross sectional studies, which were either hospital or community based. Only four of these studies were case control and two were randomized control trial [27-65].
Out of 39 studies, 17 studies were conducted among urban populations, 3 studies on the rural population and 6 studies were conducted on a population from both rural and urban areas. The remaining 13 studies did not mention demographic areas for the study population. The majority of the studies did not mention socio-economic status for the study population. The weighted mean level of vitamin D for study participants was 19.34 ng/mL (weighted SD 12.08 ng/mL) [Mean vitamin D level ranged from 4.7 ng/mL to 30.6 ng/mL]. Random effect meta-analysis showed that the weighted pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was 67% [95% CI: 61% to 73%]. This finding indicated a high degree of heterogeneity among the population. (I2 = 98.76%; p = 0.00)
Bangladesh:
We found 5 studies from Bangladesh which consisted of 695 participants. These were either cross sectional or case control studies, being hospital or community based. Out of 5 studies, 2 studies were conducted among urban populations and the other 3 studies were on both rural and urban populations in Bangladesh. Most of the study participants belong to the lower socioeconomic class [66-70]. The weighted mean level of vitamin D for study participants was 16.14296 ng/mL (weighted SD 4.83 ng/mL) [Mean vitamin D level ranged from 12.3 ng/mL to 18.6 ng/mL] and random effect meta-analysis showed that the weighted pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was 67% [95% CI: 50% to 83%]. A significant amount of heterogeneity was present (I2 = 95.53%; p =0.00)
Pakistan:
We found 18 studies from Pakistan which consisted of 4,354 participants. Study setting was either hospital based or community based and study design was cross sectional for most of the studies. Most of the studies did not mention demographic areas (urban/rural) for study population, 4 studies were conducted among urban populations and two studies included both rural and urban populations. Socio economic status for study participants was not mentioned in most of the studies, 8 studies were conducted on both lower and upper socio-economic groups of population and only one study was conducted on lower class population [71-88]. The weighted mean level of vitamin D for study participants was 17.93ng/mL (weighted SD 8.24 ng/mL) [Mean vitamin D level ranged from 8.44 ng/mL to 32ng/mL] and random effect meta-analysis showed that the weighted pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was 73% [95% CI: 63% to 83%] with high degree of heterogeneity (I2 = 98.20%; p =0.00).
Sri Lanka:
We found only one study from Sri Lanka which was a community based cross-sectional study. Socioeconomic status was not mentioned. There were 196 participants and among them 47.95% were vitamin D deficient with mean vitamin D level of 21.68 ng/mL [89].
Nepal:
We found 2 studies from Nepal consisting of 800 participants together. Out of 2 studies, one study mentioned demographic area for study population but socioeconomic status was not mentioned for any of these studies [90-91]. Study setting was either hospital based or community based and study design was cross sectional. Random effect meta-analysis showed that 57% [95% CI: 53% to 60%] of participants were vitamin D deficient with 19 ng/mL mean vitamin D level.
Analysis according to gender:
Out of 65 studies, 25 studies were conducted on adult females and 6 studies were conducted on adult males. Rest of the studies included both male and female adults as their participants. Gender-wise forest plot available in Figure 4.
Studies including participants from both gender:
We found 35 studies which included participants from both gender (male and female). Among these studies, 20 studies were conducted on Indians, 12 studies on Pakistanis and a single study on Bangladeshi, Nepali and Sri Lankan adults. These studies comprised of 39,566 participants together and random effect meta-analysis showed that 65% [95% CI: 59% to 71%] of them were vitamin D deficient with a high degree of heterogeneity (I2 = 98.89%; p = 0.00). Average vitamin D level of study participants ranged from 7 to 32 ng/mL [Weighted mean 19.54 ng/mL and weighted SD 12.06 ng/mL].
Studies including only female adults:
We found 25 studies which included only female adults as participants. Among these studies, 15 were conducted on Indians, 5 on Pakistanis, 4 on Bangladeshis and only one study on Nepali adult females. Together, these studies consisted of 4,112 participants and random effect meta-analysis showed that 76% [95% CI: 68% to 82%] of study participants were vitamin D deficient with high number of heterogeneity (I2 = 96.20%; p = 0.00). The weighted mean vitamin D level of study participants was 14.68ng/mL (weighted SD 7.86 ng/mL).
Studies including only male adults:
We found five studies which included only adult males as participants and all of these studies were conducted on Indian males. These studies comprised of 1,039 participants and random effect meta-analysis showed that 51% [95% CI: 33% to 71%] of study participants were vitamin D deficient with high number of heterogeneity (I2 = 97.68%; p = 0.00). Weighted mean vitamin D level of study participants was 22.13 ng/mL (weighted SD 7.39 ng/mL).
A bar diagram shows weighted mean level of vitamin D among SA male and female (Additional file; Figure A2)
Quality assessment:
Risk of bias score was calculated for each of the studies (Additional fie: Table A2) following the method described by Hoy et al in the year 2012 [23]. Studies that scored between 0-3 can be considered as having low risk of bias, and studies that scored 4-6 are moderate risk, and studies with scores of 7-9 can be considered as having high risk of bias. Among the 65 studies we selected; no study was found to contain a high risk of bias. Twenty-two studies showed low risk of bias, while the rest had a moderate risk of bias.
Publication bias:
The funnel plot for the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency is presented in the Additional fie which indicated the existence of asymmetry and publication bias (Additional fie; Figure A3). The Eggers test was found to be statistically insignificant which suggested no small study effects (p = 0.921) among the studies.
In this systematic review and meta-analyses, we calculated the overall pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among SA adults. We also showed country-wise and gender-wise prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in our sub-group analyses. Our findings also indicated that most of the studies were conducted on the Indian population. However, we did not find any studies regarding the vitamin D prevalence in Afghanistan, Maldives and Bhutan.