MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1148738293 · doi:10.1089/ped.2013.0312

The Link Between Plasma 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and Lung Function in General and Asthmatic Children

2014· article· en· W1148738293 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sara Khan, Xiao‐Mei Mai, Chen Yue

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Allergy Immunology and Pulmonology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung functionLink (geometry)Plasma levelsLungAsthmaVitamin D and neurologyInternal medicineCardiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vitamin D has been shown to play an important role in many bodily functions including the proper functioning of the respiratory system in adults. However, very little epidemiological evidence is available examining the relationship between vitamin D and pulmonary function among children. Our study examined the association between plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and pulmonary function in children. We used cross-sectional data from 1,421 children aged 6–17 years who participated in the Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS) in 2007–09. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to examine the association in the general children population and children with asthma. The data showed that 20% of children had plasma 25(OH)D concentration below 50 nM, which is classified as deficient. Linear regression analysis showed no significant association between 25(OH)D and lung function testing variables after adjustment for confounding factors in the general children population. However, data demonstrated a positive association of plasma 25(OH)D with FEV 0.75 , FEV 1 , and FEV 1 /FVC among boys with asthma. In summary, there was no significant relationship between plasma 25(OH)D and pulmonary function among the general children population; however, in boys with asthma, plasma 25(OH)D had a positive relationship with respiratory function.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Allergy Immunology and PulmonologySame topicVitamin D Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207