Interlaboratory Trial for Measurement of Vitamin D and 25-Hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] in Foods and a Dietary Supplement Using Liquid Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assessment of total vitamin D intake from foods and dietary supplements (DSs) may be incomplete if 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] intake is not included. However, 25(OH)D data for such intake assessments are lacking, no food or DS reference materials (RMs) are available, and comparison of laboratory performance has been needed. The primary goal of this study was to evaluate whether vitamin D3 and 25(OH)D3 concentrations in food and DS materials could be measured with acceptable reproducibility. Five experienced laboratories from the United States and other countries participated, all using liquid chromatography tandem-mass spectrometry but no common analytical protocol; however, various methods were used for determining vitamin D3 in the DS. Five animal-based materials (including three commercially available RMs) and one DS were analyzed. Reproducibility results for the materials were acceptable. Thus, it is possible to obtain consistent results among experienced laboratories for vitamin D3 and 25(OH)D3 in foods and a DS.
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 | 0.067 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".