↓ Skip to main content

The changing epidemiology of iodine deficiency

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Reviews Endocrinology, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
173 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The changing epidemiology of iodine deficiency
Published in
Nature Reviews Endocrinology, April 2012
DOI 10.1038/nrendo.2012.43
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mu Li, Creswell J. Eastman

Abstract

Globally, about 2 thousand million people are affected by iodine deficiency. Although endemic goitre is the most visible sign of iodine deficiency, its most devastating consequence is brain damage causing mental retardation in children. The relationship between iodine deficiency and brain damage was not clearly established until the 1980s when the term iodine deficiency disorders (IDDs), which encompass a spectrum of conditions caused by iodine deficiency, was introduced. This paradigm shift in the understanding of the clinical consequences of iodine deficiency led to a change in iodine deficiency assessment. The median urinary iodine excretion level has been recommended as the preferred indicator for monitoring population iodine deficiency status since 2001. The 2007 WHO urinary iodine data in schoolchildren from 130 countries revealed that iodine intake is still insufficient in 47 countries. Furthermore, about one-third of countries lack national estimates of the prevalence of iodine deficiency. The picture that has emerged from available data worldwide over the past two decades is that IDDs are not confined to remote, mountainous areas in developing countries, but are a global public health problem that affects most countries, including developed countries and island nations. The recognition of the universality of iodine deficiency highlights the need to develop and apply new strategies to establish and maintain sustainable IDD elimination and strengthen regular monitoring programmes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 171 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 33 19%
Student > Master 31 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Researcher 13 8%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 43 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 4%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Other 21 12%
Unknown 50 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 June 2022.
All research outputs
#6,537,101
of 23,870,022 outputs
Outputs from Nature Reviews Endocrinology
#1,217
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,645
of 163,734 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Reviews Endocrinology
#6
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,870,022 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.2. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 163,734 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.