ArticleEuropean thyroid journal2026
Measuring deiodinase activity: a need for standardization?
Article in European thyroid journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Thyroid hormones are produced in the thyroid gland and metabolized in the peripheral tissues. The major pathway of thyroid hormone metabolism is the removal of an iodine atom from the phenolic or tyrosyl ring by deiodinating enzymes, the so-called deiodinases. Three distinct types of deiodinase have been identified, namely type 1 (D1), type 2 (D2) and type 3 (D3), which differ in main function and expression profile. Measuring the activities of D1, D2 and D3 is an indispensable tool in research on thyroid hormone metabolism. At present, only a limited number of research laboratories worldwide measure deiodinase activity using a variety of assays and protocols. Unlike diagnostic labs, research labs rarely participate in external quality control due to limited availability for most analytes or enzymes. However, implementing a quality assurance program for deiodinase assays is crucial to ensure consistent enzyme activity across laboratories. The present study provides the results of a method comparison between five established laboratories with experience in measuring deiodinase activity. The results showed that there are considerable differences in deiodinase activity levels determined by participating laboratories, which could be partially explained by differences in techniques and protocols. We therefore concluded that in most cases, absolute deiodinase activities can only be compared within the same laboratory. External quality control only adds value when all the laboratories use the same technique with their own optimized protocols. The use of internal controls is recommended to ensure that the correct enzymatic activity is being measured over time in the same laboratory.
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.