MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146218824 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.080663

Vitamin D in adult health and disease: a review and guideline statement from Osteoporosis Canada

2010· review· en· W2146218824 on OpenAlex
David A. Hanley, Ann Cranney, Glenville Jones, Susan J. Whiting, William D. Leslie

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteomalaciaMedicineVitamin D and neurologyRicketsGuidelineOsteoporosisvitamin D deficiencyDiseaseDiabetes mellitusPediatricsClinical trialIntensive care medicinePhysiologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2002 guidelines for the management of osteoporosis published by Osteoporosis Canada [1][1] identified adequate vitamin D status, in addition to calcium from diet or supplements, as essential for the prevention of osteoporosis. Recent large clinical trials and meta-analyses have expanded our

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.327 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it