Is Low‐Dose Oral Cobalamin Enough to Normalize Cobalamin Function in Older People?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether the use of low-dose oral cobalamin (Cbl) supplements by older persons, as frequently found in multivitamin preparations, affects their Cbl serum concentrations and function, determined by measurements of the serum Cbl-related metabolites methylmalonic acid (MMA), homocysteine (HCYS), and methylcitric acid (MCTR). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred forty-two independent, active, community-living, older adult volunteers recruited from community events and activities for seniors. MEASUREMENTS: We systematically collected data on vitamin supplement intake, diet, medications, and medical and surgical history. Serum was obtained for Cbl, MMA, HCYS, and MCTR, and creatinine and hematological parameters. RESULTS: Serum levels of Cbl were significantly higher in subjects on oral Cbl supplements (2-37.5 microg/day). Similarly, serum levels of the metabolites MMA, HCYS, and MCTR were also lower in subjects on Cbl supplementation. Intake of low-dose oral supplements of Cbl significantly reduced the odds of low Cbl levels or high MMA. The relationship between Cbl supplement dosage and the biochemical parameters was dose dependent. CONCLUSION: Oral Cbl (2-37.5 microg/day) intake by community-dwelling healthy older adults is associated with higher serum levels of Cbl and improved or normalized Cbl function, as indicated by lower concentrations of the metabolites MMA, HCYS, and MCTR. Use of low-dose oral Cbl replacement therapy might be sufficient to prevent Cbl deficiency in a large proportion of this population.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".