A Changing Landscape for Vitamin A Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) remains a widespread public health problem in the developing world, despite changes in under-5 mortality rates, morbidity patterns, and intervention options. OBJECTIVE: This article considers the implications of a changing epidemiologic and programmatic landscape for vitamin A (VA) programs. METHODS: We review progress to prevent VAD and its health consequences, assess gaps in VA status and intervention coverage data, and assess data needed to guide decisions regarding the optimal mix, targeting, and dose of VA interventions to maximize benefit and minimize risk. RESULTS: Vitamin A supplementation programs have contributed to the reduction in under-5 mortality rates, but alone, do not address the underlying problem of inadequate dietary VA intakes and VAD among preschool-aged children in the developing world. A combination of VA interventions (eg, supplementation, fortified foods, multiple micronutrient powders, and lipid-based nutrient supplements) will be required to achieve VA adequacy in most settings. Current efforts to measure the coverage of multiple VA interventions, as well as whether and how much VA children are receiving, are few and fragmented. CONCLUSIONS: Where intervention overlap exists, further effort is needed to monitor VA intakes, ensuring that targeted groups are consuming adequate amounts but not exceeding the tolerable upper intake level. Vitamin A status data will also be critical for navigating the changing landscape of VA programs. Data from these monitoring efforts will help to guide decisions on the optimal mix, targeting, and exposure to VA interventions to maximize public health benefit while minimizing any potential risk.
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 | 0.025 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".