Systematic review and meta-analysis protocol examining the effect of vitamin D status and supplementation on urinary tract infection v2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several studies have demonstrated that vitamin D deficiency was associated with an increased incidence of infectious disease, including urinary tract diseases. The present systematic review aims to investigate whether vitamin D deficiency is associated with an increased incidence of urinary tract infections (UTI) and whether supplementation could reduce the risk of UTI. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be carried out in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). The search will be performed using multiple databases, including MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov. We will screen observational studies and interventional studies with our inclusion criteria and assessed the quality with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Currently we do not anticipate any problems with the implementation of the proposed protocol. The results of this study will explain the effects of vitamin D deficiency and the prevention role of vitamin D supplements on UTI.
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 | 0.078 | 0.145 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.031 | 0.029 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.079 | 0.009 |
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".