4.3 Article

Relationship between urinary cotinine and serum vitamin A levels in Korean adults: the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES), 2016-2018

Journal

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/03000605211016742

Keywords

Vitamin A; beta-carotene; Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; smoking; cotinine; supplement

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found a positive association between urinary cotinine levels and serum vitamin A levels in Korean adults, with significantly higher mean serum vitamin A levels in the smokers/electronic cigarette users group compared to the non-smokers group.
Objective To examine the relationship between urinary cotinine and serum vitamin A levels in Korean adults. Methods A total of 4445 adults (age >= 19 years) participating in the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) from 2016 to 2018 were classified by sex and as smokers/electronic cigarette users (SE) or non-smokers (NS). Data were analyzed using complex sample general linear models. Results There were no differences in dietary intake of vitamin A, carotene, or retinol between the SE and NS groups. Adjusted mean serum vitamin A levels were higher in the SE group compared with those in the NS group (0.63 mg/L vs 0.60 mg/L among men; 0.55 mg/L vs 0.51 mg/L among women). Among all participants, urinary cotinine and serum vitamin A levels were positively correlated (R-2 = 0.037). However, no correlation was observed in either the SE or NS groups individually. In a model adjusted for age, body mass index, sex, frequency of binge drinking, and dyslipidemia, a stronger correlation was observed (R-2 = 0.244). Conclusion In Korean adults, urinary cotinine levels were positively associated with serum vitamin A levels. Mean serum vitamin A levels were significantly higher in the SE group compared with the NS group.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available