MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026047392 · doi:10.1002/jbmr.2252

Standardizing Vitamin D Assays: The Way Forward

2014· article· en· W2026047392 on OpenAlexaff
Neil Binkley, Christopher T. Sempos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsOsteoporosis Canada
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesNational Center on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesCenters for Disease Control and PreventionOffice of Disease PreventionNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsVitamin D and neurologyMedicineComputational biologyBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a number of years it has been widely assumed that measurement of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentration is the best approach to assessing an individual's vitamin D status. However, it has also been recognized that there is substantial within-assay variation in 25(OH)D measurement and even greater between-assay variability. Such assay variation clearly confounds attempts to define what constitutes the diagnosis of hypovitaminosis D. Importantly, assay variability makes pooling of 25(OH)D results from different studies in systematic reviews for the specific purpose of determining dose-response and/or clinical cut points at best problematic. Therefore, to develop and implement evidence-based clinical guidelines, it is essential that 25(OH)D measurement be standardized in both clinical and research laboratories. In this Perspective we outline a way forward toward achieving this goal-the Vitamin D Standardization Program (VDSP).

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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations194
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral ResearchSame topicVitamin D Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207