Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Low vitamin D status has been known to be associated with the increased prevalence and worse prognosis of several cancers. The aim of this study was to investigate the correlation between vitamin D insufficiency and the risk of malignancy of thyroid nodules and the prognosis of differentiated thyroid cancers (DTCs). Methods: This cross-sectional study included a total of 410 patients who submitted to simultaneous measurements of serum 25-hydoxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration for thyroid nodules during the period from March 2005 to June 2009. Levels of serum free thyroxine, thyroid stimulating hormone, anti-thyroid antibodies, parathyroid hormone (PTH), calcium, and phosphorus were also measured. Vitamin D insufficiency was defined as a serum 25(OH)D level < 75 nmol/L. In addition, the clinicopathologic characteristics of 34 patients who underwent thyroidectomy for DTC were analyzed retrospectively. Results: The prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency was 40.2%. Serum 25(OH)D levels and the prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency showed no significant differences between benign (n = 366) and malignant (n = 44, 10.7%) thyroid nodules. Serum 25(OH)D levels showed a negative correlation only with serum PTH levels after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, and sampling season. Among DTC patients, vitamin D insufficiency was not associated with disease stage or any other prognostic features. Conclusions: Vitamin D insufficiency was not associated with the development of thyroid cancer or the prognostic characteristics of DTC. J Endocrinol Metab. 2016;6(4):116-122 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jem365w
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".