Maternal Vitamin D Status During Pregnancy and Bone Mass in Offspring at 20 Years of Age: A Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is uncertain whether the vitamin D status of pregnant women influences bone mass of their children. Cohort studies have yielded conflicting results; none have examined offspring at skeletal maturity. This longitudinal, prospective study investigated the association between maternal vitamin D status and peak bone mass of offspring in 341 mother and offspring pairs in the Western Australian Pregnancy Cohort (Raine) Study. Maternal serum samples collected at 18 weeks gestation were assayed for 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD). Outcomes were total body bone mineral content (BMC) and bone mineral density (BMD) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in offspring at 20 years of age. The mean (± SD) maternal serum 25OHD concentration was 57.2 ± 19.2 nmol/L; 132 women (38.7%) were vitamin D-deficient (25OHD <50 nmol/L). After adjustment for season of sample collection, maternal factors, and offspring factors (sex, birth weight, and age, height, lean mass, and fat mass at 20 years), maternal 25OHD concentration was positively associated with total body BMC and BMD in offspring, with a mean difference of 19.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.6-32.7) g for BMC and 4.6 (95% CI, 0.1-9.1) mg/cm(2) for BMD per 10.0 nmol/L of maternal 25OHD. Maternal vitamin D deficiency was associated with 2.7% lower total body BMC (mean ± SE) (2846 ± 20 versus 2924 ± 16 g, p = 0.004) and 1.7% lower total body BMD (1053 ± 7 versus 1071 ± 5 mg/cm(2) , p = 0.043) in the offspring. We conclude that vitamin D deficiency in pregnant women is associated with lower peak bone mass in their children. This may increase fracture risk in the offspring in later life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".