MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896251082 · doi:10.2147/ppa.s178403

Feasibility of vitamin D supplementation interventions to mitigate HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis-related bone mineral density loss: a cross-sectional survey

2018· article· en· W2896251082 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shaoyuan Wang, Jean‐Luc Kortenaar, Mark Hull, Gordon Arbess, James R. M. Owen, Darrell H. S. Tan

Bibliographic record

VenuePatient Preference and Adherence · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV-related health complications and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoporosisVitamin D and neurologyBone mineralPsychological interventionEmtricitabineInternal medicinePre-exposure prophylaxisBone healthVitaminCross-sectional studyPhysical therapyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Family medicineMen who have sex with menSyphilisViral load

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Daily tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/emtricitabine as HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) causes subclinical decreases in bone mineral density (BMD). We surveyed PrEP users to assess feasibility for a clinical trial of vitamin D supplementation to mitigate TDF-induced BMD loss. Methods: We recruited participants using or starting PrEP in Toronto and Vancouver. The primary objective was to assess the acceptability of daily or weekly vitamin D supplementation. We also assessed the acceptability of calcium supplementation, existing use of non-pharmacological bone health interventions, prevalence of osteoporosis risk factors, and bone health knowledge (Osteoporosis Knowledge Test, OKT). Results: Of 161 participants, 72.1% were current PrEP users, 18.0% were starting PrEP, and 9.9% did not indicate their PrEP status. All identified as males, 88.8% as gays, and 67.1% as Whites. Median (IQR) age was 32.0 (29.0, 40.0) years, and 62.1% reported family income ≥$60,000/year. Among those not already using the interventions, willingness to supplement with daily vitamin D, weekly vitamin D, or daily calcium was very high at 90.9%, 96.4%, and 93.0 %, respectively. Only 31.0% reported adequate dietary calcium intake, while 42.9% reported ≥1 osteoporosis risk factor (most commonly, alcohol and smoking). Overall bone health knowledge was low, as median (IQR) OKT score was 16/32. In post hoc comparisons, current PrEP users may have been more likely than new PrEP users to engage in bone loading exercise (Bone-specific Physical Activity Questionnaire score=12.5 vs 3.6, P =0.001) and have greater bone health knowledge (OKT=17 vs 14, P =0.08), but they had similar levels of current vitamin D supplementation (37.4% vs 21.4%, P =0.11), calcium supplementation (11.2% vs 13.8%, P =0.70), and adequate dietary calcium intake (32.7% vs 25.0%, P =0.43). Discussion: The high acceptability of vitamin D and calcium supplementation in this cohort suggests that enrollment into a clinical trial of such interventions to mitigate PrEP-induced BMD loss is feasible. Keywords: HIV, pre-exposure prophylaxis, vitamin D, calcium, bone and bones, bone density

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePatient Preference and AdherenceSame topicHIV-related health complications and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207