MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vitamin D Standardization Program (VDSP)

2012· article· en· W84125067 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christopher T. Sempos, Hubert W. Vesper, Karen W. Phinney

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandardizationNISTLibrary scienceNational laboratoryPublic healthMedical educationMedicineEngineering managementBusinessComputer scienceEngineeringPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Vitamin D Standardization Program (VDSP) was begun to correct widespread variation in 25‐hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] lab results that confounds international efforts to develop evidence‐based clinical & public health guidelines. Its objectives are to: (1) standardize measurement of total 25(OH)D in national health surveys world‐wide by linking them to the NIST reference measurement procedure (RMP); (2) study differences in 25(OH)D among those surveys; & (3) expand standardization services to include assay manufacturers & clinical & research labs. Measurands addressed in the VDSP are total 25(OH)D, 25(OH)D 2 , 25(OH)D 3 & 3‐epi‐25(OH)D 3. A formal laboratory standardization program will be implemented using procedures similar to those used in CDC Hormone Standardization (HoSt) Program. ODS provides overall coordination. A VDSP Coordinating Center has been established at CDC. NIST and Gent University (Dr. Thienpont), Belgium are the reference labs for the VDSP. Currently, VDSP is conducting an inter‐laboratory comparison study that includes labs from eight national surveys (Australia, Canada, Germany, Ireland, Mexico, South Korea, UK & US) as well as research labs & assay manufacturers to assess measurement variability in currently used assays. Data from this study will be used to create master equations to facilitate the conversion of already existing data from national health surveys to the NIST RMP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations29
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicVitamin D Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207