The Importance of Dose, Frequency and Duration of Vitamin D Supplementation for Plasma 25-Hydroxyvitamin D
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The importance of dose, frequency and duration of vitamin D supplementation for plasma 25(OH)D levels is not well described and rarely reported for supplementation that exceeds 2000 IU per day. The objective is to examine dose, frequency and duration of supplementation in relation to plasma 25(OH)D in a large population-based sample. We accessed data on 2714 volunteers that contributed to 4224 visits and applied multilevel regression. Compared to not using supplements, a minimum regimen of 1000-2000 IU once or twice per week for one month was not effective in raising 25(OH)D. Compared to this minimum regimen, higher doses of 2000-3000, 3000-4000, and 5000 IU or more were associated with a 7.49, 13.19 and 30.22 nmol/L 25(OH)D increase, respectively; frequencies of three to four, five to six and seven times/week were associated with a 5.44, 16.52 and 30.69 nmol/L increase, respectively; and supplementation of five months or longer was associated with an increase of 6.68 nmol/L (p < 0.01 for all). Age, body weight, physical activity, smoking, and self-rated health were significantly associated with 25(OH)D. Whereas dose, frequency and duration of supplementation are important to healthy subjects committed to optimizing their nutritional status, to the design of clinical trials, individual characteristics and lifestyle contribute substantially to 25(OH)D.
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 | 0.007 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".