Reading this clinical breakthrough? See how real patients are applying these numbers in real life. Compare real-world patient outcomes, lab numbers, and doctor visit tips—100% free with a private @handle and zero login wall.
Click to Ask a Question or Post Your Experience ▾
Post to Gut, Labs & Supplements Space (15 Seconds • No Account or Email Required)
Or read existing discussions in Gut, Labs & Supplements Space →
★ Breakthrough Medical Research • 15 Landmark Multi-Trial Guides • 6,295 Indexed Studies

Supplements, Bioavailability, Vitamin D3 & Micronutrient Labs — Clinical Trial Breakdowns & PubMed Evidence

Human isotope fractional absorption studies comparing chelated Magnesium Glycinate vs. Citrate vs. 4% Oxide, CYP2R1/CYP27B1 magnesium-dependent Vitamin D3 activation trials, and Metformin-induced Vitamin B12 holotranscobalamin depletion. Explore 4,327 indexed studies and multi-trial syntheses with verified PubMed PMIDs, participant sample sizes (N), and Absolute vs. Relative Risk numbers.

★ #1 Lead Breakthrough Study • NEJM SURMOUNT-1 (176 Weeks) N = 1,032 Adults • p < 0.001

Once-Weekly Tirzepatide Cuts Type 2 Diabetes Progression by 94% Over 3 Years—With a 22.9% Sustained Weight Reduction

The Plain-English Receipt: Only 1.2% of prediabetic adults on Tirzepatide progressed to Type 2 diabetes over 3.4 years vs. 19.3% on placebo (Absolute Risk Reduction = 18.1% • Number Needed to Treat = 6).

Two biomedical scientists in white lab coats inside a sunlit medical research laboratory pipetting clinical assay samples and reviewing trial results
Inside the Clinical Evidence Lab: Our research desk audits 6,295 human trials from NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA, and NCBI PubMed—reporting true Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) and sample sizes (N) without pharma spin.
3. All Indexed Clinical Studies (4,327)

Supplements, Vitamin D3 & Labs — Clinical Trials & Study Reports (4,327)

Page 118 of 145 • Sorted by Participant Sample Size (N)
Phase 3 Randomized Trial N = 86

Can This Approach Help? Inside the Latest Research on Extended intraoperative peritoneal lavage as prophylactic peritoneal recurrence

The regular use of extensive peritoneal lavage in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer, regardless of peritoneal cytology, has not been effective as prophylaxis of.

Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico • 2021-09-15 Read Study
Phase 3 Randomized Trial N = 84

Can This Approach Help? Inside the Latest Research on Radiotherapy for Ledderhose disease: Results of the LedRad-study, a prospective

Radiotherapy for symptomatic Ledderhose disease is an effective treatment resulting in a significant pain reduction, improvement of QoL scores and bare feet walking abilities, in comparison to sham-radiotherapy.

Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology • 2023-08-15 Read Study
Phase 3 Randomized Trial N = 83

Can This Approach Help? Inside the Latest Research on Basal/squamous and mixed subtype bladder cancers present poor outcomes after

Our findings underscore the importance of recognizing intra-tumor heterogeneity in MIBC and its role in chemoresistance associated with Ba/Sq subtype, and provide valuable insights that could help future treatment development...

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology • 2025-01-15 Read Study
Evidence Methodology, PubMed Verification & YMYL Standards

Frequently Asked Questions About dotMD Clinical Trial Breakdowns

Why does dotMD report both Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) and Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) on clinical trials?

Traditional health headlines often exaggerate findings by reporting only Relative Risk Reduction—for example, claiming a drug cuts risk by 50% when the event rate dropped from 2% to 1% (an Absolute Risk Reduction of just 1.0 percentage point, meaning 100 patients must take the drug for 1 person to benefit, or NNT = 100). On dotMD, every flagship study breakdown reports both Relative Risk and Absolute Risk alongside the exact sample size (N) and trial duration.

How does dotMD separate human randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from animal or observational studies?

Every study on dotMD displays its exact Study Design Tier at the top of the card (Phase 3 Randomized Trial, Randomized Controlled Trial, Meta-Analysis & Systematic Review, Multi-Trial Clinical Evidence Synthesis, Journal Watch Cohort, or FDA Safety Alert) along with the human participant count (N). Preclinical mouse or cell-culture data is never presented as human clinical proof.

Why did dotMD replace synthetic "Study Rigor Scores" with primary PubMed PMIDs and trial metadata?

Arbitrary 0-to-100 rigor scores obscure what actually makes a study trustworthy. Instead of synthetic scores, dotMD surfaces the verifiable primary evidence signals: exact NCBI PubMed IDs (PMID), ClinicalTrials.gov registration numbers (NCT), double-blind vs. crossover design, sample size (N), p-values / Hazard Ratios, and study limitations.

How do dotMD Research Breakdowns connect to Conditions, Medications, Supplements, and Specialist Doctors?

Medical research is only useful if you can act on it safely with your clinician. Every flagship research synthesis links directly to the parent Condition diagnostic cutoff guide, the Medication FDA DailyMed & CMS NADAC wholesale price ledger, the Supplement elemental weight decoder, and our High-CPT-Volume Specialist Directory.