The relationship of vitamin D deficiency and childhood diarrhea: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Vitamin D deficiency may increase the risk of childhood diarrhea. We aim to carry out a review and meta-analysis of the evidence relating vitamin D insufficiency to childhood diarrhea. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, and Cochrane Library (from inception to August 2022), then independently reviewed the eligibility, and read full-text reviews for selected articles. Keywords used were 'vitamin D', '25-hydroxyvitamin D', 'vitamin D deficiency', 'diarrhea', 'gastroenteritis', 'children', and 'pediatric'. The search was limited to studies only in English and with available full-text. Year limitation was not applied in our search. Unpublished trials, dissertations, preliminary reports, conference abstracts, and repositories were excluded from the study. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used as the risk of bias assessment tool. Meta-analysis using the random-effects model was done. RESULTS: Out of 5,565 articles, 12 articles were included in our systematic review, however only 7 articles were eligible for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant association between vitamin D deficiency and diarrhea in children in developing countries (OR = 1.79; 95% CI = 1.15 to 2.80; p = 0.01). On the secondary outcome, the association of vitamin D deficiency and duration or recurrences of diarrhea are conflicting. CONCLUSIONS: There is an association between vitamin D deficiency and the prevalence of diarrhea. Future studies should evaluate the causal association, the impact of vitamin D deficiency on the severity of diarrhea, and whether vitamin D deficiency treatments affects the prevalence of diarrhea.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".