Vitamin D in early life and later risk of multiple sclerosis—A systematic review, meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study examined results from previous studies of early life vitamin D exposure and risk of MS in adulthood, including studies on season or month of birth and of migration. A systematic review was conducted using PubMed and Web of Science databases as well as checking references cited in articles. The quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the AMSTAR score. Twenty-eight studies were selected for analysis. Of these, six population studies investigated early life vitamin D exposure and risk of MS, and three found inverse while the remaining found no associations. A consistent seasonal tendency for MS seemed evident from 11/15 studies, finding a reduced occurrence of MS for Northern hemisphere children who were born late autumn, and late fall for children born in the Southern hemisphere. This was also confirmed by pooled analysis of 6/15 studies. Results of the migration studies showed an increased risk of MS if migration from high to low-MS-risk areas had occurred after age 15 years, while risk of MS was reduced for those migrating earlier in life (<15years). A similar, but inverse risk pattern was observed among migrants from low to high-MS-risk areas. One study found an increased risk of MS in the second generation of migrants when migrating from low to high-MS-risk areas. An association between early life vitamin D and later risk of MS seems possible, however evidence is still insufficient to conclude that low vitamin D exposure in early life increases the risk of MS in adulthood. PROSPERO register number: CRD 42016043229.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.026 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".