Vitamin D Status, Cardiometabolic, Liver, and Mental Health Status in Obese Youth Attending a Pediatric Weight Management Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vitamin D (VitD) deficiency and obesity are reaching epidemic proportions in North America, particularly in those with comorbid conditions such as diabetes or liver disease. The study objective was to determine the prevalence of suboptimal vitD status and interrelationships with anthropometric, cardiometabolic, liver, mental health, and lifestyle (sleep/screen time) parameters in an ambulatory population of children with obesity. METHODS: Children (2-18 years) attending a pediatric weight management clinic (n = 217) were retrospectively reviewed. Variables studied included anthropometric (weight, height, body mass index, waist circumference), vitD (serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D), cardiometabolic (systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, glucose, insulin, homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance, triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein, low-density lipoprotein, total cholesterol), liver enzymes (alanine aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyl transferase), and mental health (number, diagnosis) parameters. RESULTS: Suboptimal vitD status (25-hydroxyvitamin D <75 nmol/L was present in 76% of children with obesity (12.0 ± 2.9 years). Blood pressure categorized as prehypertension, stage I hypertension, and stage II hypertension was present in 14%, 25%, and 7% of children, respectively. Mental health diagnoses including anxiety, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, mood disorders, and learning disabilities/developmental delays occurred in 18%, 17%, 10%, and 15%, of children, respectively. Waist circumferences >100 cm were associated with lower vitD levels (58 ± 18 vs 65 ± 17 nmol/L; P = 0.01). VitD status ≥50 nmol/L was associated with lower insulin (15.8 [11.7-23.1] mU/L vs 21.1 [14.3-34.2] mU/L; P < 0.01) and homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance (3.5 [2.5-4.9] vs 4.8 [3.1-6.9]; P < 0.01) values and systolic blood pressure percentiles (73.0 ± 25.8 vs 80.6 ± 17.0; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Children with obesity had a high prevalence of vitD deficiency, particularly those at risk for hypertension, reduced insulin sensitivity, and central obesity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".