| Title |
Estimation of the Prevalence of Inadequate and Excessive Iodine Intakes in School-Age Children from the Adjusted Distribution of Urinary Iodine Concentrations from Population Surveys 1 , 2
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nutrition, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3945/jn.115.229005 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael B Zimmermann, Izzeldin Hussein, Samia Al Ghannami, Salah El Badawi, Nawal M Al Hamad, Basima Abbas Hajj, Mohamed Al-Thani, Al Anoud Al-Thani, Pattanee Winichagoon, Tippawan Pongcharoen, Frits van der Haar, Jia Qing-Zhen, Susanne Dold, Maria Andersson, Alicia L Carriquiry |
| Abstract |
The urinary iodine concentration (UIC), a biomarker of iodine intake, is used to assess population iodine status by deriving the median UIC, but this does not quantify the percentage of individuals with habitually deficient or excess iodine intakes. Individuals with a UIC <100 μg/L or ≥300 μg/L are often incorrectly classified as having deficient or excess intakes, but this likely overestimates the true prevalence. Our aim was to estimate the prevalence of inadequate and excess iodine intake in children (aged 4-14 y) with the distribution of spot UIC from iodine surveys. With the use of data from national iodine studies (Kuwait, Oman, Thailand, and Qatar) and a regional study (China) in children (n = 6117) in which a repeat UIC was obtained in a subsample (n = 1060), we calculated daily iodine intake from spot UICs from the relation between body weight and 24-h urine volume and within-person variation by using the repeat UIC. We also estimated pooled external within-person proportion of total variances by region. We used within-person variance proportions to obtain the prevalence of inadequate or excess usual iodine intake by using the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR)/Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) cutoff method. Median UICs in Kuwait, Oman, China, Thailand, and Qatar were 132, 192, 199, 262, and 333 μg/L, respectively. Internal within-person variance proportions ranged from 25.0% to 80.0%, and pooled regional external estimates ranged from 40.4% to 77.5%. The prevalence of inadequate and excess intakes as defined by the adjusted EAR/UL cutoff method was ∼45-99% lower than those defined by a spot UIC <100 μg/L or ≥300 μg/L (P < 0.01). Applying the EAR/UL cutoff method to iodine intakes from adjusted UIC distributions is a promising approach to estimate the number of individuals with deficient or excess iodine intakes. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Ghana | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 59 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 19 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 20 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 June 2016.
All research outputs
#22,760,732
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nutrition
#9,415
of 9,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,739
of 312,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nutrition
#86
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,884 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.