MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1661154971 · doi:10.3109/00365513.2012.681950

Standardization of measurements of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 and D2.

2012· article· en· W1661154971 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Linda M. Thienpont, Hedwig Stepman, Hubert W. Vesper

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsStandardizationTraceabilityNISTVitamin D and neurologyReference valuesMedical physicsComputer scienceCalibrationMedicineStatisticsMathematicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vitamin D status is increasingly assessed/monitored in different populations, research cohorts and individual patients. This is done by measuring the liver metabolites 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 and D2 as biomarkers. Recommendations for using specific serum concentrations of these biomarkers to assess a person's vitamin D status were done. This requires current vitamin D assays to be sufficiently accurate over time, location and laboratory procedures. In view of the fact that several studies demonstrated that current 25(OH)D measurement methods do not meet this prerequisite, standardization is needed. This paper rehearses the basic concept of standardization, in particular applied to measurements of 25-hydroxyvitamin D. Progress has been made by establishing a reference measurement system consisting of reference methods and reference materials. Coordinated efforts to improve the accuracy and standardize measurements are being performed by organizations such as the U.S. NIH, the CDC and Prevention, the NIST together with their national and international partners. Beyond describing the available reference measurement system and its use as calibration hierarchy to establish traceability of measurements with routine laboratory methods to the SI-unit, this report will also focus on other aspects considered essential for a successful and sustainable standardization, such as analytical issues related to the definition of the measurand and analytical performance goals.

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)0.057
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0570.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations76
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVitamin D Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207