Abstract
Background Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, with secondary brain damage driven by inflammation and oxidative stress. Vitamin D is increasingly recognized for potential neuroprotective effects in TBI, while data regarding vitamin E remain limited.
Objective
To systematically review and meta-analyze the effects of vitamin D supplementation, and qualitatively review evidence for vitamin E, on clinical and functional outcomes after moderate to severe TBI.
Methods
A comprehensive search was carried out in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to January 2025. Studies reporting on vitamin D or E supplementation in clinical TBI were eligible. Risk of bias was assessed using JBI checklists. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials reporting pre- and post-treatment GCS scores following vitamin D supplementation was performed with a fixed-effect model.
Results
From 4,546 records, nine clinical studies met criteria; three RCTs on vitamin D (n=151 patients) were included in the meta-analysis, which found that vitamin D supplementation significantly improved GCS scores versus controls (SMD□= □1.02, 95% CI: 0.68–1.36, p□< □0.0001; I2□= □0%). Narrative analysis suggested that vitamin D may improve functional outcomes, reduce inflammatory biomarkers, and lower mortality in select studies. Evidence for vitamin E in TBI is currently limited to a small number of heterogeneous studies, with early data suggesting possible benefits for acute recovery and oxidative stress reduction, but insufficient for quantitative synthesis.
Conclusion
Vitamin D supplementation may confer short-term improvement in neurological and functional outcomes following moderate to severe TBI. Existing evidence for vitamin E is insufficient to support robust conclusions. Larger, rigorously designed RCTs—particularly for vitamin E—are required to clarify effectiveness, optimal dosing, and long-term outcomes.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵@ Co-First Author
The authors list were updated.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.