Calcium and vitamin D intake in a Canadian population : results from the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives. To estimate calcium and vitamin D intakes in Canadian men and women, to compare these intakes to Canadian guidelines, and to determine factors associated with intake of these nutrients. Methods. We estimated intakes of calcium and vitamin D from both diet and supplements using cross-sectional data from 9,423 randomly selected subjects 25 years of age and older who completed an interviewer administered abbreviated food frequency questionnaire. The participants were recruited from July 1995 to September 1997 in nine centres across Canada. We characterized the relationships of calcium and vitamin D with socio-demographic and lifestyle variables, physical characteristics, medical diagnosis and use of osteoporosis related medications. Results. The median daily intake for calcium was estimated to be 930 (interquartile range (IQR) = 589;1360) mg for women, and 774 (IQR = 507;1155) mg for men; for vitamin D, intakes were 3.6 (IQR = 1.1;10.0) pg and 2.7 (IQR = 0.9;7.5) pg for women and men, respectively. Age and study centre were found to be associated with calcium and vitamin D intakes in both genders. Other variables associated with calcium intake included vitamin D intake, weekly energy expenditure and femoral neck bone mineral density. Factors found to be associated with vitamin D intake in both genders included calcium intake, height and caffeine intake. Conclusions. The only group that on average met adequate daily intake levels for calcium was women aged 51-70. For vitamin D, on average, women and men under age 51 met adequate intake levels. Further education programs may be required to encourage increased consumption of these nutrients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".