ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2026
Iodine deficiency among thyroid conference participants in Austria.
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral studies have raised concern about the re-emergence of iodine deficiency in different countries despite longstanding salt iodization programs. In Austria, no standardized government-led urinary iodine monitoring has been conducted since 1999.
objectiveTo assess iodine status using urinary iodine concentration (UIC) and to estimate iodine intake in attendees of a thyroid-focused scientific conference in Austria.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, spot urine samples and dietary data were collected from participants of the Austrian Thyroid Dialogue 2024. The UIC was measured by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. Iodine intake was estimated using a 24‑h dietary self-assessment tool. Iodine status was classified according to World Health Organization (WHO) criteria.
resultsIn this study 91 participants were included. Median UIC was 77.6 µg/L (range: 11-904 µg/L), below the adequacy threshold of 100 µg/L, indicating insufficient iodine status. No significant differences in UIC were observed according to sex, age group, iodized salt use, or vegetarian diet. Mean estimated iodine intake was 61.0 µg/day (median: 48.8 µg/day), substantially below the recommended intake of 150 µg/day; 85.7% of participants had an intake below the average requirement (107 µg/day). No significant correlation was found between estimated iodine intake and UIC.
conclusionEven in a highly health-aware cohort, iodine intake and iodine status were largely inadequate. A comprehensive nationwide urinary iodine assessment according to WHO standards is urgently needed to determine the current iodine status in Austria and to critically evaluate whether existing iodization strategies are adequately implemented or require modification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42440104What 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.