Programme to provide Quebec infants with free vitamin D supplements failed to encourage participation or adherence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the uptake of a free vitamin D infant prescription programme and to determine the incidence of nutritional rickets. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of infants from Quebec, Canada, involving term infants born between 1998 and 2008 and covered by the public insurance programme. Data were extracted from the Quebec Pregnancy Cohort. Predictors of programme participation were identified through logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 123 018 infants were eligible, and the mean annual prevalence of supplemental vitamin D exposure was 17.9 ± 5.6%. The median age for obtaining the first bottle was 36 days and half only obtained one bottle of 50 doses. Mothers with higher socio-economic status, those who lived as a couple, older mothers or a prescription by a paediatrician significantly increased the odds of obtaining vitamin D. There was a decline in programme participation over time (OR 0.89/year, 95% CI = 0.88-0.90). The incidence of rickets was 23.9 cases per 100 000 live births, with an annual increase of 1.12 cases/year (95% CI = 1.01-1.24). CONCLUSION: Without educational measures, a free prescription programme for vitamin D failed to encourage participation or adherence. Moreover, participation decreased with time. New strategies, including educational support, need to be developed to increase vitamin D supplementation rates.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".