Vitamin D as a predictor of negative outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: An observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Serum vitamin D deficiency is thought to be associated with worse clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Methods: This single-centre observational study evaluated the association between serum vitamin D levels and negative outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Ukraine. We included hospitalized patients with COVID-19 confirmed by PCR and serum vitamin D measurement on admission. Patients were divided into two groups based on their serum vitamin D level: with adequate vitamin D (≥ 30 ng/ml) and with low vitamin D (<30 ng/ml). Outcomes such as death and the need for respiratory support were recorded. Results: A total of 70 patients were included. The gender; severity of COVID-19; comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus type 2, obesity; type of respiratory support, and the length of hospital stay did not differ in both groups. Patients with low serum vitamin D levels have higher C-reactive protein levels 26.14 mg/L [Q1, Q3: 16.61, 57.79] compared to another group 13.43 mg/L [Q1, Q3: 8.84, 27.58]. Low vitamin D level was associated with an increased risk of respiratory support need OR [Odds ratio] 2.925 [95% CI, 1.0839 to 7.8931]. However, after adjustment for age, gender, and common comorbidities, it did not remain significant. Vitamin D serum levels did not significantly differ in patients who died during hospitalization compared to those who survived. Conclusion: The role of vitamin D as a sole predictor of mortality and respiratory support appears to be overestimated. Low vitamin D levels may have a greater impact on COVID-19 outcomes in hospitalized elderly patients with comorbidities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".