Vitamin use among children attending a Canadian pediatric emergency department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing use of vitamins has been documented worldwide in children and adolescents, and potential for vitamin-drug interactions exists. The aim of this study was to identify vitamin use by children visiting a pediatric emergency department (ED). A survey of parents and/or patients 0-18 years was conducted at a large pediatric ED in Canada. A total of 1804 families were interviewed. The main outcome measure was prevalence of vitamin use by children in the preceding 3 months. A third (32.3%) of the patients in our cohort had used vitamins in the preceding 3 months, and 48% of them were taking vitamins daily. Over 8% of all children used vitamins within the last 24 h. The use of vitamins was higher with older patient and parental age (P<0.001), chronic patient illness (P<0.001), completed immunization (P<0.001), concurrent patient use of prescribed medications (P=0.02), higher parental education (P<0.01), and English as a primary language spoken at home (P=0.002). Prevalence of vitamin use among children in the ED is 32% in the preceding 3 months and 8% within the last 24 h. In light of these findings, pediatricians should ask about vitamin use and discuss with parents potential interactions and possible adverse effects.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".