MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414160322 · doi:10.1016/j.ajcnut.2025.09.002

Can correction of low vitamin D status in infancy program for a leaner body composition? A posttrial follow-up study of whole body lean mass in early childhood

2025· article· en· W4414160322 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Maryam Razaghi, Nathalie Gharibeh, Catherine A. Vanstone, Shu Qin Wei, Dayre McNally, Frank Rauch, Glenville Jones, Kati Heinonen, Hope A. Weiler

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth CanadaQueen's UniversityShriners Hospitals for Children - CanadaUniversity of OttawaMcGill UniversityChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioOttawa Fertility Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaAcademy of FinlandCanada Research ChairsMcGill University
KeywordsLean body massVitamin D and neurologyBody mass indexEarly childhoodLower body

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D supplementation is recommended for infants fed human milk and may have a role in supporting the development of lean body mass. OBJECTIVE: (cholecalciferol) supplementation in infancy (1-12 mo) on lean body mass were maintained posttrial, ≤36 mo of age. METHODS: This posttrial follow-up study of a vitamin D supplementation trial (98 infants aged from 1-12 mo in Montréal) included 49 children at 24 mo (400 IU/d: n = 21, 1000 IU/d: n = 28) until early study closure; the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic precluded reporting at 36 mo and completion of a nonrandomized reference group. The primary outcome was whole body lean mass (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry). Other outcomes included: serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] (immunoassay), measures of anthropometry, and whole body fat mass and bone mineral content (BMC). Developmental milestones were added at 24 mo (Ages and Stages Questionnaire-3). Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects regression with random intercepts; differences posttrial were tested if the treatment × time interaction was significant. RESULTS: At 24 mo whole body lean mass [difference: 538.5 g; 95% confidence interval (CI): 44.2, 1032.8 g; P =0.033], BMC (difference: 25.08 g; 95% CI: 2.59, 47.56; P = 0.029), weight (difference: 0.90 kg; 95% CI: 0.17, 1.63; P = 0.016), and length (difference: 2.4 cm; 95% CI: 0.9, 4.0; P = 0.002) were greater in the 1000 IU/d group than the 400 IU/d group. Serum 25(OH)D concentrations, fat mass, and developmental milestones were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The greater whole body lean mass observed in infants in our published trial of 1000 IU/d of vitamin D supplementation compared with 400 IU/d was maintained posttrial at 24 mo in accordance with greater length. Confirmation of these observations, and whether these extend into later childhood, requires new trials. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02563015 (https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/study/NCT02563015).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.372 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition→Same topicVitamin D Research Studies→French-language works237,207→