Overweight and obesity are associated with lower vitamin D status in Canadian children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There is evidence that 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels are lower in overweight and obese youth. This study examined the relationship between weight status and 25-hydroxyvitamin D, while controlling for confounders, in Canadian youth. METHODS: percentile) with 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and the odds of 25-hydroxyvitamin D <40 nmol/L and <50 nmol/L. RESULTS: The prevalence of risk of vitamin D deficiency (25-hydroxyvitamin D < 30 nmol/L) was 6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.26% to 10.12%). Vitamin D inadequacy, estimated by levels <40 nmol/L, was 15% (95% CI 10.34% to 20.39%; 19% [95% CI 13.1 to 25.6] for teenagers). Seventy per cent (95% CI 63.59 to 75.17) had levels >50 nmol/L, consistent with achieving the Recommended Dietary Allowance. In adjusted analyses, overweight/obesity (1/3 of subjects) was independently associated with lower 25-hydroxyvitamin D for both sexes after adjustment for age, race, income, season, vitamin D supplementation and daily milk consumption. For 25-hydroxyvitamin D <40 nmol/L, the overweight/obese odds ratio for males was 2.63 (95% CI 1.34 to 5.18). For 25-hydroxyvitamin D <50 nmol/L, overweight/obese odds ratios were 2.19 (95% CI 1.46 to 3.28) for males and 1.39 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.84) for females. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the inverse association between adiposity and serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D in Canadian youth and the independent association of overweight/obesity to 25-hydroxyvitamin D level and vitamin D status after adjustment for other factors.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".