Vitamin D Status in Healthy Free-Living Elderly Men and Women Living in Québec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess vitamin D status in relation to age, sex, season, adiposity, physical activity level, and supplement use in healthy elderly Canadians living in Québec. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Data for 405 healthy free-living elderly Quebécers aged between 68 and 82 years with no major health problems were examined. SUBJECTS: Men and women in age groups of 68-72, 73-77, and 78-82 years, in 2 seasons, participating in the NuAge cohort. MEASUREMENTS: serum 25(OH)D assessed by radioimmunoassay (RIA), weight, height, smoking status, disease status, education, perception of income, Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE) questionnaire, and vitamin D supplement consumption. RESULTS: The prevalence of vitamin D deficiency (25(OH)D <37.5 nmol/L) was 12.6% and 5.7% for men in winter and summer, and 8.7% and 1.9% for women, respectively. Over 50% of the participants had 25(OH)D concentrations <75 nmol/L. Correlates of vitamin D status by multiple regression analysis indicated that the vitamin D level in summer was 13.8 nmol/L higher for participants measured in winter and 17.2 nmol/L higher for those using supplements. Age, sex, body mass index, and physical activity were not associated with 25(OH)D concentration. CONCLUSION: Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency is low in healthy elderly men and women, especially in summer, but over 50% of the participants had suboptimal vitamin D concentrations. Vitamin D supplement consumption increased 25(OH)D concentrations substantially, particularly in the winter months, and should be encouraged.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".