MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Effect of Vitamin D Fortified Cheese on Oral Glucose Tolerance in Individuals Exhibiting Marginal Vitamin D Status and an Increased Risk for Developing Type 2 Diabetes: A Double‐Blind, Randomized Placebo‐Controlled Clinical Trial

2016· article· en· W4389008716 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Tracy Moreira‐Lucas, Alison M. Duncan, Rémi Rabasa‐Lhoret, Reinhold Vieth, Alison L. Gibbs, Alaa Badawi, Thomas M.S. Wolever

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaMontreal Clinical Research InstituteUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Toronto
FundersPublic Health Agency of CanadaDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineGlycated hemoglobinDiabetes mellitusPlaceboEndocrinologyPostprandialVitamin D and neurologyType 2 diabetesGlycemicGlycemic indexInsulinRandomized controlled trialQuantitative insulin sensitivity check indexType 2 Diabetes MellitusGlucose homeostasisImpaired fasting glucoseImpaired glucose toleranceInsulin resistanceInsulin sensitivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epidemiological data suggest that vitamin D may play a role in glucose metabolism and homeostasis, and that it maybe particularly important for individuals at an increased risk for developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Objective We conducted a double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled trial to examine the effects of 28,000 IU of vitamin D3 given in cheese once per week versus placebo on the 2hr oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and measures of insulin sensitivity, secretion and β‐cell function. Study Design Potential participants were identified as being at an increased risk for developing diabetes using the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) questionnaire. Participants who were vitamin D deficient (serum 25‐hydroxy vitamin‐D [25(OH)D] ≤65nmol/L) and who had elevated glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) between 5.4 and 6.4% and/or fasting glucose between 5.6 and 6.9 mmol/L were randomized to receive 28,000 IU of vitamin D3 or placebo (20 IU) once weekly for a period of 24 weeks. The primary outcome of interest was the difference in plasma glucose 2hr after an OGTT between baseline and 24 wks. Secondary outcomes include fasting glucose, fasting and postprandial insulin and indices of insulin sensitivity (Matsuda Index), secretion (insulinogenic index), β–cell function (ISSI‐2) and long‐term glycemic status (HbA1c). Data were analyzed by intention‐to‐treat. Results Seventy‐one participants (mean age 47.4) were randomized and sixty‐three completed the trial. Supplementation produced a significant increase in serum 25(OH)D in the vitamin D group (n= 35) versus placebo (n=36) (103.6±36.5 vs. 46.4±18.9 nmol/ L, p <0.0001). After 24 wks of supplementation 74% of participants in the vitamin D group achieved 25(OH)D levels ≥75nmol/Lvs6% in the placebo group. Supplementation produced no significant improvements in fasting (p=0.89) and glucose 2hr after the OGTT (p= 0.88), fasting (p= 0.28) and postprandial (p= 0.77) insulin, HbA1c (p=0.34), HOMA‐IR (p= 0.32), Matsuda Index (p=0.72), and ISS1‐2 (p=0.86). Conclusion Weekly doses of 28,0000 IU of vitamin D3 for 24 wks in a group of multi‐ethnic, vitaminD–deficient individuals identified as being at high risk for developing T2DMdid not improve oral glucose tolerance, insulinsensitivity, β–cell function or HbA1c. Support or Funding Information Research funded by the Dairy Farmers of Canada and the Public Health Agency of 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicVitamin D Research Studies→French-language works237,207→