Vitamin D Concentration during Early Pregnancy and Adverse Outcomes among HIV-Negative Women in Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania: A Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the associations of plasma vitamin D concentration and adverse pregnancy outcomes among HIV-negative women in Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania. We used an unmatched case-control study design, with 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentration assessed in the first trimester. Cases were individuals with adverse pregnancy outcomes, including stillbirth, premature birth, or small for gestational age births (SGA). Unconditional logistic regression and weighted logistic regression models were used to describe the associations of 25(OH)D concentration with the composite of adverse pregnancy outcome and individual adverse pregnancy outcomes, respectively. We included 310 cases and 321 controls. In controls, 5(2%) were vitamin D deficient (25(OH)D < 20 ng/mL), and 17(5%) had insufficient 25(OH)D concentration (20.0–29.9 ng/mL). Women with 25(OH)D < 20 ng/mL had 1.82 times the odds of occurrence of the composite adverse pregnancy outcome (OR = 1.82, 95% CI: 0.56–5.93; p = 0.32), however we noted a non-linear association between 25(OH)D concentration and adverse pregnancy outcome (p = 0.02). We found a 3-fold increased odds of stillbirth in women with low 25(OH)D concentration (OR = 3.11, 95% CI: 1.18–8.23, p = 0.02). Vitamin D concentration in early pregnancy may be an important factor in determining the course of pregnancy. Further research is needed to investigate whether the association of maternal 25(OH)D concentration in early pregnancy and stillbirth is causal.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".