4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Methods of assessment of selenium status in humans: a systematic review

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 89, 期 6, 页码 2025S-2039S

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.2009.27230F

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To understand the effect of selenium intake on health, it is important to identify sensitive and population-specific biomarkers of selenium status. Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to assess the usefulness of biomarkers of selenium status in humans. Design: The methods included a structured search strategy on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE (Ovid), and Cochrane databases; formal inclusion and exclusion criteria; data extraction into an Access database; validity assessment; and meta-analysis. Results: The data from 18 selenium supplementation studies (of which 9 were randomized controlled trials and 1 was considered to be at low risk of bias) indicate that plasma, erythrocyte, and whole-blood selenium, plasma selenoprotein P, and plasma, platelet, and whole-blood glutathione peroxidase activity respond to changes in selenium intake. Although there is a substantial body of data for plasma selenium, more large, high-quality, randomized controlled trials are needed for this biomarker, as well as for the other biomarkers, to explore the reasons for heterogeneity in response to selenium supplementation. There was insufficient evidence to assess the usefulness of other potential biomarkers of selenium status, including urinary selenium, plasma triiodothyroxine: thyroxine ratio, plasma thyroxine, plasma total homocysteine, hair and toenail selenium, erythrocyte, and muscle glutathione peroxidase activity. Conclusions: For all potentially useful biomarkers, more information is needed to evaluate their strengths and limitations in different population groups, including the effects of varying intakes, the duration of intervention, baseline selenium status, and possible confounding effects of genotype. Am J Clin Nutr 2009; 89(suppl): 2025S-39S.

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