Seasonal variation in vitamin D levels in psoriatic arthritis patients from different latitudes and its association with clinical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. Vitamin D insufficiency appears to be a pandemic problem and is more common in inhabitants of high latitude compared to low latitude areas. We aimed to determine the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), its seasonal and geographic variation, and the possible association with demographics and disease activity.Methods. This study was conducted in a northern geographic area and in a subtropical region from March 2009 to August 2009. Most subjects were assessed in both winter and summer. Demographics, clinical data, skin photo type, and serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) levels were determined. Multivariate linear and logistic mixed models were used to assess the relationship with serum 25(OH)D levels.Results. In total, 302 PsA patients were enrolled. Two hundred fifty-eight patients were evaluated during the winter,while 214 patients were evaluated during the summer. 25(OH)D levels in winter and summer were adequate (north: 41.3%winter and 41.4% summer, south: 42.1% winter and 35.1% summer), insufficient (north: 55.7% winter and 58.6% summer,south: 50.9% winter and 62.2% summer), and deficient (north: 3% winter and 0% summer, south: 7% winter and 2.7%summer) among patients. There was no association between 25(OH)D levels, geographic and seasonal interaction, race,employment status, and skin photo type or disease activity in both seasons. No association between disease activity in summer and vitamin D levels in winter could be found.Conclusion. A high prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency among PsA patients was found. There was no seasonal variation in 25(OH)D levels among PsA patients in the southern and northern sites. No association could be established between disease activity and vitamin D level.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".