Vitamin D supplementation prior to or during COVID-19 associated with better 3-month survival in geriatric patients: Extension phase of the GERIA-COVID study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this extension phase of the quasi-experimental GERIA-COVID study was to determine whether vitamin D3 supplementation taken prior to or during COVID-19 was associated with better 3-month survival in geriatric patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS: Intervention group was defined as all participants supplemented with vitamin D3 prior to or during COVID-19 (n = 67). Supplements were either bolus vitamin D3 (ie, 50,000 IU per month, or 80,000 IU or 100,000 IU or 200,000 IU every 2-3 months), or daily supplementation with 800 IU. Comparator group involved those without vitamin D supplements (n = 28). Outcome was 3-month mortality. Covariables were age, sex, functional abilities, history of malignancies, cardiomyopathy, undernutrition, number of acute health issues, antibiotics use, systemic corticosteroids use, and 25(OH)D concentration. RESULTS: 76.1 % (n = 51) of participants survived at 3 months in Intervention group, compared to only 53.6 % (n = 15) in Comparator group (P = 0.03). The fully-adjusted hazard ratio for 3-month mortality was HR = 0.23 [95 %CI: 0.09;0.58](P = 0.002) in Intervention group compared to Comparator group. Intervention group had also longer survival time (log-rank P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin D3 supplementation was associated with better 3-month survival in older COVID-19 patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".