The prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency in calcium oxalate stone formers in Ontario, Canada, and the impact of vitamin D supplementation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Low vitamin D is a possible risk factor among calcium oxalate (CaOx) stone formers, although its routine assessment and the role for supplementation remain controversial. This study aimed to examine the prevalence of low vitamin D in a large Canadian cohort and to assess the impact of replacement therapy on metabolic and radiographic outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with CaOx stones who underwent a full metabolic evaluation, including two 24-hour urine collections in a multidisciplinary metabolic stone clinic, was conducted to determine the prevalence of 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25-OH vitamin D) deficiency/insufficiency. A subset of patients receiving vitamin D supplementation was assessed longitudinally for changes in metabolic parameters and stone growth and compared to a cohort with normal values. RESULTS: vs. 27.5 [24.3-31.9], p<0.001), and to be male (53.6 vs 44.4%, p=0.019). Among 83 patients receiving vitamin D with a mean followup of 4.8 years, none became hypercalcemic. Serial imaging demonstrated 41% had an increase in stone burden over time, which was not significantly different from those not requiring supplementation. CONCLUSIONS: Low vitamin D is very common among Canadian CaOx stone formers and should be a routine part of an in-depth metabolic workup. Vitamin D administration can be safely recommended to stone formers without risk of inducing stone progression.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".