Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 527

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Global prevalence and disease burden of vitamin D deficiency: a roadmap for action in low‐ and middle‐income countries

Open access
Roth, Daniel E., Abrams, Steven A., Aloia, John, Bergeron, Gilles, Bourassa, Megan W., Brown, Kenneth H., Calvo, Mona S., Cashman, Kevin D., Combs, Gerald, De‐Regil, Luz María, Jefferds, Maria Elena, Jones, Kerry S., Kapner, Hallie, Martineau, Adrian R., Neufeld, Lynnette M., Schleicher, Rosemary L., Thacher, Tom D., Whiting, Susan J.·2018·Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1111/nyas.13968
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Vitamin D is an essential nutrient for bone health and may influence the risks of respiratory illness, adverse pregnancy outcomes, and chronic diseases of adulthood. Because many countries have a relatively low supply of foods rich in vitamin D and inadequate exposure to natural ultraviolet B (UVB) radiation from sunlight, an important proportion of the global population is at risk of vitamin D deficiency. There is general agreement that the minimum serum/plasma 25‐hydroxyvitamin D concentration (25(OH)D) that protects against vitamin D deficiency–related bone disease is approximately 30 nmol/L; therefore, this threshold is suitable to define vitamin D deficiency in population surveys. However, efforts to assess the vitamin D status of populations in low‐ and middle‐income countries have been hampered by limited availability of population‐representative 25(OH)D data, particularly among population subgroups most vulnerable to the skeletal and potential extraskeletal consequences of low vitamin D status, namely exclusively breastfed infants, children, adolescents, pregnant and lactating women, and the elderly. In the absence of 25(OH)D data, identification of communities that would benefit from public health interventions to improve vitamin D status may require proxy indicators of the population risk of vitamin D deficiency, such as the prevalence of rickets or metrics of usual UVB exposure. If a high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency is identified (>20% prevalence of 25(OH)D < 30 nmol/L) or the risk for vitamin D deficiency is determined to be high based on proxy indicators (e.g., prevalence of rickets >1%), food fortification and/or targeted vitamin D supplementation policies can be implemented to reduce the burden of vitamin D deficiency–related conditions in vulnerable populations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/nyas.13968

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 9 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Roth, D. E., Abrams, S. A., Aloia, J., Bergeron, G., Bourassa, M. W., Brown, K. H., Calvo, M. S., Cashman, K. D., Combs, G., De‐Regil, L. M., Jefferds, M. E., Jones, K. S., Kapner, H., Martineau, A. R., Neufeld, L. M., Schleicher, R. L., Thacher, T. D., & Whiting, S. J.
Venue
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-09-18
Volume
1430
Issue
1
Pages
44-79
ISSN
  • 0077-8923 (ISSN-L)
  • 1749-6632
DOI
10.1111/nyas.13968
OpenAlex
W2891732635
Cited by
527
References
9
FWCI
30.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.