MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976472175 · doi:10.1210/er.2012-1000

The Nonskeletal Effects of Vitamin D: An Endocrine Society Scientific Statement

2012· review· en· W1976472175 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEndocrine Reviews · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer InstituteNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsVitamin D and neurologyObservational studyEndocrine systemMedicineVitaminCalcitriol receptorvitamin D deficiencyBioinformaticsPhysiologyClinical trialRandomized controlled trialEndocrinologyInternal medicineBiologyHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significant controversy has emerged over the last decade concerning the effects of vitamin D on skeletal and nonskeletal tissues. The demonstration that the vitamin D receptor is expressed in virtually all cells of the body and the growing body of observational data supporting a relationship of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D to chronic metabolic, cardiovascular, and neoplastic diseases have led to widespread utilization of vitamin D supplementation for the prevention and treatment of numerous disorders. In this paper, we review both the basic and clinical aspects of vitamin D in relation to nonskeletal organ systems. We begin by focusing on the molecular aspects of vitamin D, primarily by examining the structure and function of the vitamin D receptor. This is followed by a systematic review according to tissue type of the inherent biological plausibility, the strength of the observational data, and the levels of evidence that support or refute an association between vitamin D levels or supplementation and maternal/child health as well as various disease states. Although observational studies support a strong case for an association between vitamin D and musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, neoplastic, and metabolic disorders, there remains a paucity of large-scale and long-term randomized clinical trials. Thus, at this time, more studies are needed to definitively conclude that vitamin D can offer preventive and therapeutic benefits across a wide range of physiological states and chronic nonskeletal disorders.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.344 · 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