Association Between Vitamin D Level and Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background In recent years, vitamin D in the occurrence of lung diseases has gradually become a hot topic. Although the role of vitamin D in normal lung development has been confirmed, the correlation between vitamin D level and neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS) is not clear. Objective To evaluate the association between vitamin D level and NRDS. Methods We performed a comprehensive search of the following electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). Literature screening and quality assessment were performed according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological components of each study, and Stata 15.1 software to perform the Meta-analysis. Results A total of nine case-control studies were included, with 653 infants with NRDS and 501 infants without NRDS. The Meta-analysis showed no heterogeneity across all studies(I 2 =0.0%, P=0.583). The fixed-effect model showed that 25 hydroxy vitamin D level of children in the NRDS group was significantly lower than that of the non-NRDS group(SMD = −0.51, 95%CI: −0.63 to −0.39, p ≤ 0.05). Conclusion This systematic review and meta-analysis study suggests that vitamin D deficiency is very likely to be a high-risk factor of NRDS, and reasonable vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy and after birth is of great significance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".