ArticlePublic health nutrition2018
Constituent analysis of iodine intake in Armenia.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe sought to assess the universal salt iodization (USI) strategy in Armenia by characterizing dietary iodine intake from naturally occurring iodine, salt-derived iodine in processed foods and salt-derived iodine in household-prepared foods.
designUsing a cross-sectional cluster survey model, we collected urine samples which were analysed for iodine and sodium concentrations (UIC and UNaC) and household salt samples which were analysed for iodine concentration (SI). SI and UNaC data were used as explanatory variables in multiple linear regression analyses with UIC as dependent variable, and the regression parameters were used to estimate the iodine intake sources attributable to native iodine and iodine from salt in processed foods and household salt.
settingArmenia is naturally iodine deficient; in 2004, the government mandated a USI strategy. SUBJECTS: We recruited school-age children (SAC), pregnant women (PW) and non-pregnant women of reproductive age (WRA).
resultsFrom thirteen sites covering all provinces, sufficient urine and table salt samples were obtained from 312 SAC, 311 PW and 332 WRA. Findings revealed significant differences between groups: contribution of native iodine ranged from 81% in PW to 46% in SAC, while household salt-derived iodine contributed from 19% in SAC to 1% in PW.
conclusionsDifferences between groups may reflect differences in diet. In all groups, household and processed food salt constituted a significant part of total iodine intake, highlighting the success and importance of USI in ensuring iodine sufficiency. There appears to be leeway to reduce salt intake without adversely affecting the iodine status of the population in Armenia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.