Association between dietary vitamin intake and mortality in US adults with diabetes: A prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims To explore the association of dietary vitamin intake from food and/or supplement with mortality in US adults with diabetes. Materials and Methods This prospective cohort study was conducted on 5418 US adults with diabetes from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999–2018. Vitamin intake from food and supplements was estimated via dietary recall. Sufficient intake from food or food + supplement was defined as ≥ estimated average requirement (EAR) and ≤ tolerable upper intake level (UL), insufficient intake, < EAR; and excess intake, > UL. Medium supplementary intake was classified as > median level and ≤75th percentile; low intake, ≤ median level; and high intake, >75th percentile, as reported by supplement users. Results A total of 1601 deaths occurred among the participants over a median follow‐up of 11.0 years. Cox regression analysis of the single‐vitamin model demonstrated that sufficient vitamin A and folate intake from food and food + supplement and medium vitamin A and folate intake from supplement; sufficient riboflavin, niacin, and vitamin B 6 intake from food and food + supplement; and sufficient thiamin and vitamin E intake from food + supplement were significantly associated with reduced all‐cause mortality (all p < 0.05). In the multivitamin model, sufficient vitamin A and folate intake from food and food + supplement, medium vitamin A and folate intake from the supplement, and sufficient niacin intake from food and food + supplement were inversely associated with mortality (all p < 0.05). Conclusions Vitamin A and folate intake from food or supplement and niacin intake from food were significantly associated with reduced mortality in US adults with diabetes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".