Relationship between vitamin D level in children and adolescents with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: A Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the association between vitamin D level and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in children and adolescents. MethodsRelated English and Chinese databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, CBM, Wanfang Data, and VIP, were searched for studies on the association between vitamin D level and NAFLD in children and adolescents published up to August 2020. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate quality of studies, and RevMan 5.3 software was used for data analysis. ResultsA total of 10 articles were included in the meta-analysis, with 622 patients in the NAFLD group and 1608 in the healthy control group. All 10 articles had an NOS score of ≥6. A pooled analysis of the 10 articles was performed using a random effects model (I2=97%, P＜0.05). The NAFLD group had a significantly lower serum 25(OH) D level than the healthy control group (standardized mean difference=-1.40, 95% confidence interval: -2.07 to -0.72). ConclusionThere is a significant reduction in serum vitamin D level in children and adolescents with NAFLD, which may be associated with the progression and severity of NAFLD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.047 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".