MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387117377 · doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuad117

Optimizing vitamin D status in polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4387117377 on OpenAlexafffund
Kelsey M Cochrane, Jeffrey N. Bone, Brock A. Williams, Crystal D Karakochuk

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsPolycystic ovaryMeta-analysisMedicineVitamin D and neurologyOvaryInternal medicineEndocrinologyPhysiologyGynecologyObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common and complex endocrine disorder in women of reproductive age. Vitamin D supplementation is a promising complementary therapy for PCOS, yet there is no consensus on an optimal dose, leading to a lack of evidence-based supplementation guidelines. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to conduct a vitamin D dose-response meta-analysis among women with PCOS. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases from inception to November 2022 were searched for relevant articles. DATA EXTRACTION: Study screening and bias assessment were conducted by 2 independent reviewers. Eight relevant studies were identified; data for serum 25(OH)D (nmol/L) at baseline and at 12 weeks in each intervention group (mean ± SD) and vitamin D dose were extracted. DATA ANALYSIS: Estimates across studies were used to create a pooled curve, using restricted cubic splines with knots at the 10th, 50th, and 90th percentiles of the distribution of doses, to estimate the mean difference in effect for serum 25(OH)D at each dose compared with 0 IU/day. Sensitivity analyses were conducted fixing knots at 4000 IU/day and 7000 IU/day, which were a priori identified as potentially important thresholds, and to assess model fit and estimate heterogeneity. The pooled analysis demonstrated strong evidence of a dose-response relationship (P < .001), suggesting an increasing effect with increasing dose. An initial increase in serum 25(OH)D was evident until doses of approximately 3000 IU/day; this was followed by a plateau in effect between approximately 3000 IU/day and 5000 IU/day. The effect of supplementation with >5000 IU/day was unclear, given the minimal data at higher doses. The curve produced robust results for moderate doses (3000 IU/day to 4000 IU/day), which were not sensitive to model specification. CONCLUSION: Women with PCOS are responsive to vitamin D supplementation, but the benefit of providing doses of >3000 IU/day appears minimal. Further data is required to determine dose-response at doses of >5000 IU/day, and whether higher intakes provide a clinically meaningful advantage in this population. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42021259396.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.131
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition ReviewsSame topicOvarian function and disordersFrench-language works237,207