Vitamin D Level and Supplementation in Pediatric Atopic Dermatitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND:: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin condition characterized by a pruritic eczematous rash. Evidence surrounding the role of serum vitamin D (VD) in modifying disease severity is inconsistent. OBJECTIVES:: To determine whether VD levels are correlated with AD severity and the effects of VD supplementation on disease modification. METHODS:: This was a 2-phase study, using a cross-sectional design to evaluate the relationship between VD level and severity, as well as a double-blinded, randomized control trial to elucidate the effects of VD supplementation. Patients aged 0 to 18 years with AD were included in phase 1, and disease severity and serum VD levels were determined. Those with renal, liver, or other dermatologic conditions were excluded. Patients with abnormal (<72.7 nmol/L) VD levels were eligible for phase 2 and to be randomized to either VD supplementation of 2000 IU/d or placebo. VD level and severity were assessed at baseline and 3 months. RESULTS:: The 77 patients included in phase 1 had a mean (SD) age of 7.4 (4.5) years, and 45.5% (33/77) were female. Increased severity was significantly correlated with lower VD levels ( P = .015). Of the 45 patients included in phase 2, 21 and 24 were assigned to the supplementation and placebo arm, respectively. The mean (SD) change in severity did not differ significantly between the supplementation (15.35 [9.71]) and placebo (15.13 [8.97]) groups after 3 months of intervention ( P = .7). CONCLUSION:: Although VD levels correlated with AD severity, VD supplementation did not significantly improve disease severity.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".