4.7 Article

Adequate Urinary Iodine Concentration among Infants in the Inland Area of Norway

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 13, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu13061826

关键词

infants; iodine; knowledge; urinary iodine concentration; UIC; iodine intake; inland area; Norway

资金

  1. Innlandet Hospital Trusts [150421]
  2. Regional Research Fund Innlandet [286442]
  3. OsloMet

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated iodine status in Norwegian infants and found that infants in the inland area of Norway had adequate iodine levels. Weaned infants had higher iodine intake and urinary iodine concentration compared to exclusively breastfed and partially breastfed infants, indicating that dietary data may not accurately capture iodine intake in infants.
Considering the importance of iodine to support optimal growth and neurological development of the brain and central nervous system, this study aimed to assess and evaluate iodine status in Norwegian infants. We collected data on dietary intake of iodine, iodine knowledge in mothers, and assessed iodine concentration in mother's breast milk and in infant's urine in a cross-sectional study at two public healthcare clinics in the inland area of Norway. In the 130 mother-infant pairs, the estimated infant 24-h median iodine intake was 50 (IQR 31, 78) mu g/day. The median infant urinary iodine concentration (UIC) was 146 (IQR 93, 250) mu g/L and within the recommended median defined by the World Health Organization for this age group. Weaned infants had a higher UIC [210 (IQR 130, 330) mu g/L] than exclusively breastfed infants [130 (IQR 78, 210) mu g/L] and partially breastfed infants [135 (IQR 89, 250) mu g/L], which suggest that the dietary data obtained in this study did not capture the accurate iodine intake of the included infants. The iodine status of infants in the inland area of Norway seemed adequate. Weaned infants had higher UIC compared to breastfed infants, suggesting early access and consumption of other sources of iodine in addition to breast milk.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据