Vitamin D Status of People 3 to 79 Years of Age from the Canadian Health Measures Survey 2012–2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vitamin D is recognized in bone health and the prevention of rickets and osteomalacia. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess vitamin D status of people in Canada and to identify factors associated with vitamin D inadequacy and deficiency. METHODS: Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) from the Canadian Health Measures Survey (cycles 3-6, n = 21,770, 3-79 y) were evaluated for geometric means and proportions <40 (inadequate) and <30 (risk of deficiency) nmol/L. Factors associated with inadequacy or deficiency were tested using logistic regression. RESULTS: : 4.63; 95% CI: 2.62, 8.19) race compared with White. Similar factors were observed in children and for deficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Most people in Canada have adequate vitamin D status; nonetheless, racialized groups have an elevated prevalence of inadequacy. Further research is required to evaluate if current strategies to improve vitamin D status, including increasing vitamin D in fortified foods and supplements, and dietary guidance to include a source of vitamin D every day help to reduce health inequality in Canada.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".