Vitamin D deficiency: a study of community beliefs among dark skinned and veiled people
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim: Vitamin D is essential for musculoskeletal health. In addition to known high risk for older, housebound or institutionalized people, there are increasing reports of vitamin D deficiency in younger Australian populations, who are dark‐skinned and/or veiled. The aim of this study is to investigate socio‐cultural barriers and enablers to reducing risk of vitamin D deficiency among dark‐skinned and veiled community groups in a Melbourne metropolitan area. Methods: A qualitative exploratory study was undertaken by an acute and community care partnership group based in the City of Melbourne and City of Moonee Valley areas, Victoria, Australia. Community‐dwelling people 18 years or more who were dark‐skinned or veiled participated. A trained facilitator used semistructured questions to explore awareness of vitamin D deficiency, knowledge about risks and barriers to risk management. Discussion was summarized and dominant themes extracted. Results: There were gender differences in awareness of risk. Men were unaware or considered themselves not to be at risk of vitamin D deficiency. Cultural issues influenced access to, and sourcing of, health information. In particular, community opinion leaders and use of local media such as radio were considered important avenues for knowledge transfer in addition to health care providers. Relocation from community settings in Africa to the built environment of Melbourne was reported to inhibit safe, comfortable and culturally appropriate access to sun exposure. Access to, and sustained use of vitamin D supplementation was limited by financial constraints. Conclusion: A comprehensive health promotion response that includes health provider and community partnerships is required to meet the complex needs of these communities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".