Vitamin D status of Canadians employed in northern latitudes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency are prevalent worldwide, but relatively few studies have examined vitamin D status in working populations. AIMS: To assess the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency in Canadian workers and investigate risk factors in this population. METHODS: A cross-sectional study using data from a health programme enrolling workers mostly from Northern Alberta, Canada. As part of the programme, volunteers were invited to complete a lifestyle questionnaire. Blood was taken to determine plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels. Logistic and linear regressions were used to investigate the relationships between individual characteristics and vitamin D status. RESULTS: Between October 2007 and December 2012, 6101 eligible workers enrolled in the health programme. The prevalence of vitamin D deficiency (plasma 25(OH)D, levels <27.5 nmol/l) and insufficiency (<37.5 nmol/l) were 3 and 8%, respectively. Male employees were significantly more likely to be vitamin D deficient and insufficient than females. Residing at a more northern latitude increased the likelihood of vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency. Age, assessments made in summer, better general health and physical activity and use of vitamin D supplementation were all related to lower likelihood of deficiency and insufficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency are a concern in this sample of Canadian workers. Vitamin D supplementation is recommended to reduce the prevalence of deficiency and insufficiency in this group.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".