MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399923125 · doi:10.1111/epi.18046

Vitamin D prophylaxis in persons with epilepsy?

2024· review· en· W4399923125 on OpenAlexaff
Jo Sourbron, Stéphane Auvin, Leonor Cabral‐Lim, Anita Devlin, Dennis Dluglos, Hassan Hosny, Kimford J. Meador, Archana A. Patel, Page B. Penell, Kate Riney, Eugen Trinka, Samuel Wiebe, Lieven Lagae

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyMedicineVitamin D and neurologyPediatricsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Limited guidelines exist regarding osteoporosis prevention in the general population. Despite being a subject of controversy, the majority of research suggests that decreased vitamin D levels correlate with increased bone turnover, that is, an important risk factor for osteoporosis development. In most guidelines, daily vitamin D supplementation is recommended. In persons with epilepsy (PWE), the situation is more complex, as other factors can increase the chance of being vitamin D deficient. Currently, there are no internationally accepted guidelines regarding monitoring bone health in PWE. Our aim was to review the existing evidence in PWE on: (1) risk factors for vitamin D deficiency, (2) the identification of higher risk groups, and (3) the optimal ways to monitor bone health. Our narrative review shows that: (1) anti-seizure medication (ASM) use, especially enzyme-inducing ASM (EIASM) and valproic acid, is identified as an important risk factor for impaired bone health (e.g., increased risk for osteoporosis/fractures and/or vitamin D deficiency); (2) higher risk groups within the PWE population are present: intellectual or physical disability, institutionalized patients, puberty, early onset epilepsy and developmental epileptic encephalopathies, postmenopausal women, and use of multiple ASM/concomitant drugs (e.g. corticosteroids); and (3) a monitoring scheme can be suggested including laboratory tests, bone density measurements, managing of risk factors, and/or vitamin D supplementation. Overall, regular vitamin D measurement in PWE is a cost-effective and practical method for monitoring vitamin D deficiency, whereas in high-risk patients the combination of vitamin D measurement and bone densitometry is recommended. There is not enough evidence to advocate continuous vitamin D supplementation in all PWE. Children with epilepsy should receive the recommended daily intake of vitamin D for age and additional monitoring and supplementation if at higher risk of deficiency. There is a need for prospective trials exploring the potential benefit of vitamin D supplementation in PWE.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity StudiesFrench-language works237,207