MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312285042 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afw025

40VITAMIN D DEFICIENCY: RELATION WITH INDEX OF MULTIPLE DEPRIVATION IN THE OVER 70S

2016· article· en· W2312285042 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian Heald, Ann Babits, Simon Anderson, Jonathan Scargill, Anthony Short, Megan Livingstone, David P. Holland, A. Frier

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and Applications
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIndex (typography)vitamin D deficiencyVitaminGerontologyInternal medicinePhysiologyVitamin D and neurology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction There is increasing evidence concerning potential adverse consequences of low Vitamin D levels on health. We have previous shown that there is no surrogate for measuring vitamin D levels in the general population. Here we determined whether this finding was apparent in the over 70s age group. We also investigated the relation between the index of multiple deprivation (IMD) and vitamin D levels in older people. Methods Serum specimens with requests for 25-hydroxy Vitamin D (25-OH Vitamin D), calcium, phosphate, parathyroid hormone (PTH) and alkaline phosphatase, on the same sample at Salford Royal Hospital from November 2010 to November 2012 were analysed for 70 men and 171 women aged 70 years or more at their last birthday, excluding renal clinic attendees. Results The prevalence of total vitamin D insufficiency or deficiency (defined as total Vitamin D <50 nmol/L) was 57.3% overall, with men having similar prevalence to women (60.0% vs 56.1%). There was no overall trend in mean serum adjusted calcium across categories of 25-OH Vitamin D status. As expected PTH levels rose as Vitamin D levels fell: for Vitamin D ≥50 nmol/L, PTH 47.1 ng/l; Vitamin D <10nmol/L, PTH 117.6ng/L.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207