MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Prenatal vitamin D supplementation and infant vitamin D status in Bangladesh (256.4)

2014· article· en· W1551951294 on OpenAlexaff
Nandita Perumal, Abdullah Al Mahmud, Abdullah H Baqui, Daniel Roth

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPublic Health OntarioHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVitamin D and neurologyVitaminvitamin D deficiencyPlaceboPregnancyPrenatal carePediatricsInternal medicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We aimed to determine the effect of prenatal vitamin D supplementation on infant vitamin D status in Dhaka, Bangladesh (23°N), where vitamin D supplementation is not routine. Serum 25‐hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration was measured at <1, 2, 4, and 6 months of age among infants born to women randomized to receive vitamin D3 (VD: 35,000 IU/week) or placebo (PL) during the 3rd trimester of pregnancy. Mean 25(OH)D (n=115) was significantly higher among infants born to VD vs PL mothers at <1 month (80 ± 20 nmol/L vs 22 ± 18 nmol/L; P<0.001) and at 2 months of age (52 ± 19 nmol/L vs 40 ± 23 nmol/L; P=0.04), but the groups were similar at 4 months (P=0.41) and 6 months (P=0.27). Among infants of PL mothers (n=55), mean 25(OH)D increased to 78 ± 29 nmol/L by 6 months of age. Measured environmental (e.g. season) and dietary factors did not substantially explain the increase in 25(OH)D with age. In conclusion, high‐dose prenatal 3rd trimester vitamin D supplementation substantially improved infant vitamin D status during the early postnatal period. The age‐related rise in 25(OH)D from birth to 6 months suggested that routine postnatal infant vitamin D supplements may have a limited role in this setting. Grant Funding Source : Supported by the Thrasher Fund and the Department of Paediatrics, Hospital for Sick Children

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicChild Nutrition and Water Access→French-language works237,207→