Association of Serum Vitamin D Levels with Depression in Adults: A Nationwide Population-based Study in Korea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Vitamin D status may be associated with depression, but there have been inconsistencies in the reported estimates. This study aimed to examine the association of vitamin D status with depression in a large general population sample. Methods Cross-sectional data for a representative Korean sample of 1,825 people aged 19 years or older were obtained from the nationally representative Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2014). Depression was defined by Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) scores ≥10 (moderate/severe). Logistic regression was used to estimate the associations between depression and serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels. Continuous serum 25(OH)D level was categorized into quartiles. Continuous PHQ-9 scores were assessed using quantile regression. Adjustments for age, sex, marital status, level of education, lowest income quartile, body mass index, level of physical activity, chronic conditions, serum creatinine level, glomerular filtration rate, and history of depression were used in the statistical analyses. Estimates of prevalence and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were made. Sampling weights were utilized to account for survey design effects. Results Individuals in the lowest serum 25(OH)D quartile level had significantly higher prevalence of depression than in the upper three quartiles (8.3% vs. 5.1%; p=0.024). No association was observed between serum 25(OH)D level and depression after adjusting for potential covariates (OR 1.48, 95%CI 0.93, 2.35; p=0.097]. However, a stronger association was observed among male respondents, with an estimated OR of 2.54 (95% CI 1.17, 5.50; p=0.018). Additionally, in the quantile regression analysis, estimates from adjusted models remained significant (β = −0.056, p=0.002). Conclusion While our findings support the association between lower vitamin D status and depression in Korean adults, additional studies are needed to clarify this relationship.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".