Late Breaking Abstract - Vitamin D In the prevention of Viral-induced Asthma (DIVA) in preschoolers: a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To examine the efficacy and safety of high-dose vitamin D supplementation in reducing severe exacerbations in high-morbidity preschool-aged children with viral-induced asthma. Methods: In a randomised placebo-controlled parallel-group multicentre trial, children aged 1-5 years with prior viral-induced exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids (OCS) were randomly assigned to: 2 oral boluses of 100,000 IU (3.5 months apart) with daily 400 IU vitamin D3 or placebo boluses and daily placebo over 7 months. The primary outcome was the number of exacerbations requiring rescue OCS, analysed by a negative binomial regression model, adjusted for sites. Secondary outcomes included acute-care visits, hospitalisations, laboratory-confirmed viruses, and safety. Results: We randomised 323 children (median age: 2.3 years; 65% male) with a median of 2 (IQR:1-10) OCS in the past year; 52% had serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) <75 nmol/L and 90% were on GINA 2024 Step≥3 therapy. The supplemented group was associated with a rapid and sustained rise in 25OHD, with 96% vs. 62% reaching ≥75 nmol/L at endpoint. Supplementation was not associated with a lower incidence rate ratio (IRR) of rescue OCS (0.94: 95% CI 0.69-1.28), acute-care visits (0.88: 0.61-1.26), hospitalisations (0.77: 0.29-2.08) for asthma or laboratory-confirmed viral infections (0.96: 0.78-1.18). There was no significant group difference in adverse events. Conclusions: In preschoolers with high-morbidity viral-induced asthma, vitamin D supplementation did not reduce the rate of severe exacerbations or respiratory viral infections compared to placebo. This strategy was not associated with any safety concerns.( NCT03365687 )
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".