Institute for Global Nutrition and Department of Nutrition, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, United States; Micronutrient Forum, Washington, DC, United States.
Institute for Global Nutrition and Department of Nutrition, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, United States.
Adv Nutr. 2023 Nov;14(6):1466-1478. doi: 10.1016/j.advnut.2023.08.011. Epub 2023 Aug 25.
Micronutrient deficiencies result in a broad range of adverse health and functional consequences, but the true prevalence of specific deficiencies remains uncertain because limited information is available from nationally representative surveys using recommended biomarkers. The present review compares various reported national deficiency prevalence estimates for nutrients and years where the estimates overlap for individual countries that conducted nationally representative surveys and explores possible reasons for any discrepancies discovered. Nationally representative micronutrient status surveys that were conducted since 2000 among preschool-aged children or women of reproductive age and included assessment of iron, vitamin A, or zinc status based on recognized biomarkers were considered eligible for inclusion, along with any modeled deficiency prevalence estimates for these same countries and years. There was considerable variation across different published prevalence estimates, with larger inconsistencies when the prevalence estimate was based on proxies, such as hemoglobin for iron deficiency and dietary zinc availability for zinc deficiency. Numerous additional methodological issues affected the prevalence estimates, such as which biomarker and what cutoff was used to define deficiency, whether the biomarker was adjusted for inflammation, and what adjustment method was used. For some country-years, the various approaches resulted in fairly consistent prevalence estimates. For other country-years, however, the results differed markedly and changed the conclusions regarding the existence and severity of the micronutrient deficiency as a public health concern. In conclusion, to determine micronutrient status, we consider the assessment of one of the recommended biomarkers in a population representative survey as the best available information. If indicated, results should be adjusted for inflammation and generally acceptable cutoffs should be applied to facilitate comparisons, although individual countries may also apply nationally defined cutoffs to determine when and where to intervene. Global consensus is needed on best practices for presenting survey results and defining the prevalence of deficiency.
微量营养素缺乏会导致广泛的健康和功能不良后果,但由于使用推荐生物标志物的全国代表性调查提供的信息有限,特定缺乏症的真实流行率仍不确定。本综述比较了使用推荐生物标志物进行的全国代表性调查中各种报告的营养素缺乏流行率估计值,以及在个别国家进行全国代表性调查的年份中重叠的估计值,并探讨了发现的任何差异的可能原因。自 2000 年以来,针对学龄前儿童或育龄妇女进行的全国代表性微量营养素状况调查,且包括根据公认生物标志物评估铁、维生素 A 或锌状况的调查,以及这些国家和年份的任何模型化缺乏流行率估计值,均符合纳入标准。不同发表的流行率估计值存在很大差异,当流行率估计值基于血红蛋白(用于铁缺乏症)和膳食锌供应(用于锌缺乏症)等替代指标时,差异更大。许多其他方法学问题影响了流行率估计值,例如用于定义缺乏症的生物标志物和截止值、生物标志物是否调整了炎症以及使用了何种调整方法。对于一些国家/年份,各种方法得出的流行率估计值相当一致。然而,对于其他国家/年份,结果差异很大,改变了关于作为公共卫生问题的微量营养素缺乏的存在和严重程度的结论。总之,为了确定微量营养素状况,我们认为在具有代表性的人群调查中评估推荐生物标志物之一是最佳的现有信息。如果有必要,应根据炎症进行调整,并应普遍采用可接受的截止值来促进比较,尽管个别国家也可以应用国家定义的截止值来确定何时何地进行干预。需要就呈现调查结果和定义缺乏症流行率的最佳实践达成全球共识。