ReviewEuropean journal of nutrition2022
Revised D-A-CH reference values for the intake of biotin.
Review in European journal of nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Potential Neuroprotective Role of Biotin in Neurorehabilitation: A Review.Current nutrition reports · 2026Review
- Reference Values for B Vitamins in Human Milk: The Mothers, Infants and Lactation Quality (MILQ) Study.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2025Article
- Individualized supplement of water-soluble vitamins: the influence of inflammation and renal function on circulating concentrations in critically digestive disease patients.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Biotinylated Quinone as a Chemiluminescence Sensor for Biotin-Avidin Interaction and Biotin Detection Application.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Physiological Associations between Vitamin B Deficiency and Diabetic Kidney Disease.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Nutritional Status of Slovene Adults in the Post-COVID-19 Epidemic Period.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe reference values for biotin intake for Germany, Austria and Switzerland lead back to a report in 2000. Following a timely update process, they were revised in 2020.
methodsFor infants aged 0 to < 4 months, adequate biotin supply via human milk was assumed and in consequence the reference value reflects the amount of biotin delivered by human milk. For infants aged 4 to < 12 months, biotin intake was extrapolated from the reference value for younger infants. Due to missing data on average requirement, the reference values for biotin intake for children, adolescents and adults were derived based on observed intake levels. The reference value for lactating women considered in addition biotin losses via human milk.
resultsThe reference value for biotin intake for infants aged 0 to < 4 months was set at 4 µg/day and for infants aged 4 to < 12 months at 6 µg/day. In children and adolescents, the reference values for biotin intake ranged from 20 µg/day in children 1 to < 4 years to 40 µg/day in youths 15 to < 19 years. For adults including pregnant women, 40 µg/day was derived as reference value for biotin intake. For lactating women, this value was set at 45 µg/day.
conclusionsAs deficiency symptoms of biotin do not occur with a usual mixed diet and the average requirement cannot be determined, reference values for an adequate biotin intake for populations from Germany, Austria and Switzerland were derived from biotin intake levels assessed in population-based nutrition surveys.
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.