Relationship between plasma vitamin D level and cardiometabolic disease risk factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Vitamin D is thought to modulate cardiometabolic disease risk through effects on an array of disease-associated pathways, such as glucose and lipid metabolism and inflammation. Although vitamin D insufficiency is thought to play a role in the susceptibility to cardiometabolic disease, the association between the two conditions is yet to be investigated in both men and women from the general population. Methods: Subjects (n= 1,928, age range 16-79 yrs) from Canada were examined. Plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] by month of clinic visit were plotted for men and women to examine the monthly fluctuation patterns. Linear regression models adjusted for sex, waist circumference, physical activity, hormone use, and season of clinic visit examined the linear associations between 25(OH)D and cardiometabolic biomarkers [glucose, insulin, HOMA-IR, triglycerides, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total:HDL-C ratio, apolipoprotein(apo)A1, apoB] and biomarkers of inflammation [C reactive protein (CRP), fibrinogen, and homocysteine]. Analyses were repeated separately for men and women. Results: Monthly variation in 25(OH)D was noted for both men and women, with mean levels fluctuating more widely throughout the year in men (50 to 80 nmol/L) than in women (60 to 75 nmol/L). Significant inverse associations with 25(OH)D were noted for insulin (β= -0.16, p=0 .003), HOMA-IR (β= -0.18, p= 0.002), triglycerides (β= -0.21, p= 0.004), total cholesterol (β= -0.31, p= 0.046), LDL-C (β= 0.09, p= 0.02), and total:HDL-C ratio (β= -0.09, p= 0.004). When the population was stratified by sex, significant inverse associations with 25(OH)D were observed for insulin (β= -0.21, p= 0.002), HOMA-IR (β= -0.24, p= 0.002), and triglycerides (β= -0.26, p= 0.01) among men, and insulin (β= 0.13, p= 0.05), HOMA-IR (β= -0.14, p= 0.03), total cholesterol (β= -0.34, p= 0.05), LDL-C (β= -0.10, p= 0.02), and total:HDL-C ratio (β= -0.10, p= 0.001) among women. Conclusions: Plasma 25(OH)D levels vary month-to-month, and fluctuate more widely in men than in women. Vitamin D may modulate multiple processes related to the cardiometabolic biomarkers and disease risk and may, thereby, play a role in disease prevention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
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 teacher head, 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".