Iron and Vitamin D Status in Female Gee-Gees Varsity Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to measure the nutritional status of iron and vitamin D in varsity female athletes from the University of Ottawa and the possible relationship with their dietary patterns (mixed diet or plant-based diet). Among 63 athletes interested in participating, 17 completed the study. Nutritional intakes were assessed during sports season using two 24-hour recalls with the self-administered dietary assessment tool (ASA24). A blood sample was taken to measure indicators of iron and vitamin D status. The results revealed that 5% of the athletes suffered from vitamin D deficiency and as much as 47% had suboptimal vitamin D levels. No athletes suffered from iron deficiency anemia (IDA), but 26% had iron deficiency (ID). The vitamin D intake for 94% of athletes was below the estimated average requirements (EAR) and the use of supplements helped athletes attain the EAR. In contrast, 94% of athletes were able to meet the EAR for iron and the use of supplements caused athletes to exceed upper limits (UL). Lastly, due to the small number of plant-based athletes recruited, it was not possible to establish any relationships with this dietary pattern.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".