Vitamin D Doses from Solar Ultraviolet and Dietary Intakes in Patients with Depression: Results of a Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study to estimate cumulative vitamin D doses from solar ultraviolet and dietary intakes in patients with depression and compare it to healthy controls. Using a case-control research design, a sample of 96 patients with depression were age- and sex-matched with 96 healthy controls. Dietary vitamin D dose was estimated from diet analysis. Vitamin D-weighted ultraviolet solar doses were estimated from action spectrum conversion factors and geometric conversion factors accounting for the skin type, the fraction of body exposed, and age factor. Patients with depression had a lower dose of vitamin D (IU) per day with 234, 153, and 81 per day from all sources, sunlight exposure, and dietary intake, respectively. Controls had a higher intake of vitamin D (IU) per day with 357, 270, and 87 per day from all sources, sunlight exposure, and dietary intake, respectively. Only 19% and 30% met the minimum daily recommended dose of ≥400 IU per day for cases and controls, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, percentage correctly classified and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) Area for the estimated vitamin D against serum vitamin D as reference were 100%, 79%, 80%, and 89%. Physical activity level was the only predictor of daily vitamin D dose. Vitamin D doses are lower than the recommended dose of ≥400 IU (10 mcg) per day for both cases with depression and healthy controls, being much lower in the former.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".