Vitamin D status of immigrant mothers and infants in Metro Vancouver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies suggest Canadian children from immigrant families may be at higher risk for rickets. However, little is known about the vitamin D status of immigrant mothers and infants in Canada. We measured 25‐hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) in Asian and Middle Eastern immigrant (n=40) and White (n=40) mothers and their infants aged 2–4 months living in Vancouver (49°N). Mothers completed diet and sun exposure questionnaires. Mean 25OHD concentrations of immigrant mothers were lower than those of White mothers (68 vs 78 nmol/L; p=0.02), but 25OHD concentrations of their babies did not differ (82 vs 79 nmol/L; p=0.67). Only 1 White mother, 1 infant with a White mother, and 1 infant with a Middle Eastern mother had a 25OHD concentration indicative of severe deficiency (<25 nmol/L). However, 7 (18%) immigrant mothers and 2 (5%) White mothers (p=0.08) and 3 (8%) immigrants’ infants and 6 (15%) White infants (p=0.29) were vitamin D insufficient (<50 nmol/L). Multivariate analyses showed that ethnicity, body mass index, and vitamin D supplement use were significant predictors of 25OHD in mothers. Only supplement use was a significant predictor for infants. In conclusion, immigrant mothers were at marginally higher risk of vitamin D insufficiency than White mothers, but their infants had similar vitamin D status. (Supported by the Canadian Vitamin Class Action settlement) Grant Funding Source : Canadian Vitamin Class Action settlement
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".