MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Association Among Vitamin D status, Bone Geometry and Muscle Structure in 14 to 18 y Female Adolescents with Usual Intake of < 2 Servings of Milk and Alternatives per Day

2017· article· en· W4389020031 on OpenAlexafffundabout
May Slim, Catherine A. Vanstone, Suzanne N. Morin, Elham Rahme, Hope A. Weiler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversitySte. Anne's HospitalUniversité Sainte-Anne
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsMedicineVitamin D and neurologyAnthropometryQuantitative computed tomographyBone mineralInternal medicineBone densityEndocrinologyLean body massAnalysis of varianceOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The associations among vitamin D status, based on serum 25‐hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD), and bone geometry and muscle structure in adolescents is under investigated. The objective was to explore the relationships among serum 25OHD and bone and muscle parameters of the lower leg and forearm in female adolescents with usual intake of < 2 servings of milk and alternatives per day. Healthy adolescents (14 to 18 y, n=50) from the Greater Montreal area participating in a trial (NCT02236871) were divided into three groups according to serum 25OHD level (<50, n=15; 50–74.9, n= 25; and ≥75 nmol/L, n=10) at baseline. Trabecular and cortical volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), cortical thickness (CT) and bone area (BA) of the radius (4% and 66% sites), the tibia (4%, 38% and 66% sites) and muscle cross‐sectional area and density (66% sites) were obtained using peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT, XCT‐2000; Stratec). Fasted venous blood was sampled to measure serum 25OHD concentration (Liaison, Diasorin). Lean mass and fat mass were acquired using dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry (DXA; Hologic Discovery QDR series). This was followed by standardized anthropometry, individual topological angle (ITA) as well as 24‐hour recall for dietary calcium, vitamin D, total energy and protein intake. All data reflect baseline only. Differences among 25OHD level groups for bone and muscle parameters were tested using mixed model ANOVA with post‐hoc Bonferroni adjustment. Data are presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise stated. Multivariate linear regression models, adjusting for age, height, fat mass, lean mass, ethnicity, skin color and vitamin D intake, were applied to evaluate the association between 25OHD and bone parameters. Participants (n= 50) had a mean age of 16.4 ± 1.5 y and a BMI of 21.7 ± 3.1 kg/m 2 (). No significant differences among the groups were obtained for any of the bone parameters except for trabecular vBMD at the 4% tibia, where the group with 25OHD levels of >75 nmol/L revealed greater vBMD values than the group with less than 50 nmol/L (). Muscle parameters did not differ among vitamin D status groups. After applying multivariate linear regression models, the association between 25OHD and bone parameters remained significant for trabecular vBMD of the 4% tibia (). Findings of this study support a beneficial role of vitamin D status in skeletal health of female youth. Further longitudinal studies are needed to determine whether changes in vitamin D status over time associates with peak bone mass. Support or Funding Information Supported by a contribution from the Dairy Research Cluster Initiative (Dairy Farmers of Canada, Agriculture and Agri‐food Canada, the Canadian Dairy Network and the Canadian Dairy Commission), Canada Foundation for Innovation and Canada Research Chairs Program Descriptive characteristics of the study population 25OHD Levels (nmol/L) Total Sample, n = 50 < 50, n =15Means ± SD 50 – 74.9, n = 25Means ± SD ≥ 75, n = 10Means ± SD 25OHD (nmol/L) 63.7 ± 27.8 38.9 ± 7.6 60.3 ± 6.4 109.2 ± 25.4 Age (y) 16.4 ± 1.5 16.6 ± 1.4 16.4 ± 1.7 16.1 ± 1.3 Ethnicity, white (%) 66 40 66.7 100 Height (cm) 165.0 ± 7.0 165.9 ± 7.1 164.0 ± 7.3 166.3 ± 6.3 Weight (kg) 60.7 ± 10.8 62.8 ± 12.6 58.8 ± 10.2 62.5 ± 9.9 BMI (kg/m 2 ) 22.2 ± 3.2 22.7 ± 3.5 21.8 ± 3.1 22.6 ± 3.1 Fat Mass (kg) 16.9 ± 5.6 18.0 ± 5.1 15.9 ± 5.6 17.7 ± 6.4 Lean Mass (kg) 42.5 ± 6.9 42.4 ± 7.8 40.6 ± 5.7 42.6 ± 4.7 Vitamin D Intake (IU/d) 108.7 ± 118.4 128.7 ± 106.1 133.6 ± 88.9 128.1 ± 95.2 Calcium Intake (mg/d) 741.4 ± 445.9 705.2 ± 469.6 727.5 ± 449.5 830.8 ± 435.0 Protein Intake (g/d) 73.3 ± 38.6 65.3 ± 36.1 77.8 ± 43.4 74.2 ± 30.4

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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