Vitamin D improves inflammatory bowel disease outcomes: Basic science and clinical review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vitamin D deficiency is commonly diagnosed among patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Patients with IBD are at risk of low bone density and increased fractures due to low vitamin D levels, long standing disease, and frequent steroid exposures; as a result, it is well established that vitamin D supplementation in this population is important. There is increasing support for the role of vitamin D in strengthening the innate immune system by acting as an immunomodulator and reducing inflammation in experimental and human IBD. The active form of vitamin D, 1,25(OH)D3, acts on T cells to promote T helper (Th)2/regulatory T responses over Th1/Th17 responses; suppresses dendritic cell inflammatory activity; induces antibacterial activity; and regulates cytokine production in favor of an anti-inflammatory response. Murine and human IBD studies support a therapeutic role of vitamin D in IBD. Risk factors for vitamin D deficiency in this population include decreased sunlight exposure, disease duration, smoking, and genetics. Vitamin D normalization is associated with reduced risk of relapse, reduced risk of IBD-related surgeries, and improvement in quality of life. Vitamin D is an inexpensive supplement which has been shown to improve IBD outcomes. However, further research is required to determine optimal serum vitamin D levels which will achieve beneficial immune effects, and stronger evidence is needed to support the role of vitamin D in inducing disease response and remission, as well as maintaining this improvement in patients' disease states.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".