Maternal Vitamin D Status and Gestational Weight Gain as Correlates of Neonatal Bone Mass in Healthy Term Breastfed Young Infants from Montreal, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The implications of maternal gestational weight gain (GWG) and vitamin D status to neonatal bone health are unclear. We tested whether maternal 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and GWG relate to neonatal bone mineral content (BMC) and bone mineral density (BMD). Healthy term appropriate for gestational age breastfed neonates (n = 142) and their mothers were recruited 24–36 h after delivery and followed at 1.0 ± 0.5 month. At birth, obstetric data were collected and newborn serum 25(OH)D was measured. At 1 month, neonatal whole-body (WB) BMC, WB BMC relative to body weight (WB BMC/kg), lumbar spine BMC and BMD, maternal and neonatal 25(OH)D concentrations, and anthropometry were measured. Infant BMC and BMD between maternal 25(OH)D (<50, ≥50 nmol/L) and GWG (insufficient, adequate, and excessive) categories were compared. Maternal 25(OH)D was not related to infant whole-body BMC, BMC/kg, lumbar spine BMC, and BMD. Infants in the excessive maternal GWG category had greater (p = 0.0003) whole-body BMC and BMC/kg and lumbar spine BMC and BMD than inadequate GWG, and greater (p = 0.0063) whole-body BMC/kg and lumbar spine BMC and BMD than adequate GWG. These results suggest that maternal GWG, but not vitamin D status, modestly relates to bone mass in neonates.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".