ArticleEuropean journal of sport science2026
Potential Usefulness of Urinary Hepcidin Measurement for Iron Deficiency Anemia in Female Athletes.
Article in European journal of sport science, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hepcidin is a key regulator of iron metabolism and has been proposed as a biomarker for detecting iron deficiency. This study examined serum hepcidin and non-invasively measured urinary hepcidin in 260 female athletes to assess their potential utility in evaluating iron status. Urinary hepcidin/creatinine showed a strong correlation with serum hepcidin and was positively associated with ferritin, suggesting that it reflects underlying iron dynamics. Iron-related measures, including hepcidin, showed expected differences across iron-status categories, consistent with physiological changes from iron repletion to iron deficiency anemia. In diagnostic analyses, both serum hepcidin and urinary hepcidin/creatinine demonstrated good accuracy for identifying iron deficiency including iron deficiency anemia. Serum hepcidin yielded AUCs of approximately 0.85-0.90, while urinary hepcidin/creatinine showed AUCs around 0.85-0.88. Internal validation produced consistent confidence intervals, suggesting stable estimates. At the Youden-optimal cutoff, both markers showed comparable performance, with sensitivities of 0.74-0.91, specificities of 0.73-0.92, and high negative predictive values (0.83-0.97). These cutoff values were derived from internally validated analyses and should be considered preliminary, requiring external validation before broader clinical implementation. These findings suggest that hepcidin-based measures may assist in ruling out iron deficiency or guiding triage decisions. Because urinary hepcidin can be obtained non-invasively and demonstrated performance similar to serum hepcidin, it may represent a practical screening option in athletic populations, although further external validation is needed.
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.