Relationship between 25-hydroxy vitamin D and knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: In order to examine the relationship between 25-hydroxyl vitamin D and knee osteoarthritis (KOA), a meta-analysis of 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) publications was hereby performed. Methods: For the purpose of finding pertinent research, the databases of PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched. Factors including tibial cartilage volume, joint space width (JSW), synovial fluid volume, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) were correspondingly evaluated, and the results were expressed using SMD and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: The present meta-analysis evaluated the effects of vitamin D supplementation in patients with knee osteoarthritis, with 3,077 patients included. The results showed that vitamin D administration had a statistically significant impact on the amount of synovial fluid, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and tibial cartilage. The pain and function scales of the WOMAC scale presented a statistically significant difference, and there was no discernible difference between the vitamin D and placebo groups in the stiffness scale. Additionally, bone marrow lesions and alterations in the diameter of the joint space were not influenced by the administration of vitamin D, and according to a subgroup study, a daily vitamin D supplement containing more than 2,000 IU significantly slowed the development of synovial tissue. Conclusion: Vitamin D supplementation did benefit those suffering from knee discomfort and knee dysfunction. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022332033, identifier: CRD42022332033.
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 | 0.017 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".