ArticleIranian journal of nursing and midwifery research
Benchmarking Rapid Screening Kits versus Iodometric Titration for Iodine Quantification in Household Salt.
Article in Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery research. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Iodine deficiency remains a significant public health issue. Despite universal salt iodization efforts in Razavi Khorasan Province, accurate monitoring of iodine content in salt continues to pose challenges. This study evaluates the precision and accuracy of rapid screening kits compared to iodometric titration-the gold standard-for quantifying iodine in household salt, aiming to improve monitoring strategies in the region. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2024, collecting 153 household salt samples from areas affiliated with Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Iodine content was measured using the Waheb iodine test kit, which provides both qualitative and quantitative results. These were compared with iodometric titration. Iodine levels were classified according to WHO/UNICEF/IGN guidelines and Iranian National Standards. Statistical analysis included sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and Cohen's kappa coefficient to assess agreement between methods. Results: The mean (SD) iodine concentration measured by the rapid screening kits was 35.75 (13.85) µg/g, while iodometric titration showed 58.38 (31.45) µg/g. The rapid screening kits demonstrated a sensitivity of 84.91% (95% CI: 72.41-93.25%), specificity of 20.00% (95% CI: 12.67-29.18%), positive predictive value of 80.94%, and a negative predictive value of 24.88%. Agreement between methods was poor (Cohen's kappa = 0.037). Conclusions: Despite their convenience, rapid screening kits show limited reliability in accurately assessing iodine levels in table salt. The significant discrepancy with iodometric titration highlights the need for improved quality control and development of more accurate rapid testing tools to effectively prevent and control iodine deficiency.
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.