Vitamin D Intake in a Population-Based Sample of Young Polish Women, Its Major Sources and the Possibility of Meeting the Recommendations.

Zofia Utri, Dominika Głąbska
Author Information
  1. Zofia Utri: Department of Dietetics, Institute of Human Nutrition, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (SGGW-WULS), 159c Nowoursynowska Street, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland. ORCID
  2. Dominika Głąbska: Department of Dietetics, Institute of Human Nutrition, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (SGGW-WULS), 159c Nowoursynowska Street, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland. ORCID

Abstract

The recommendations of Vitamin D intake are commonly not met, which results from the fact that fish, being its major sources, are commonly rarely consumed. Consequently, a reliable estimation of its habitual intake is also difficult, as its daily intake is highly variable. The aim of the study was to analyze Vitamin D intake from food, its major sources and the possibility to meet its recommendations in a population-based sample of young Polish women. The study was conducted in a sample of Polish women aged 15-30 years, recruited in cooperation with local students' and youth organizations from all regions of Poland (convenience sampling with the snowball effect), while the stratified sampling procedure was applied with a random quota sampling for voivodeships (an administrative subdivision), to obtain an adequate distribution regarding the general population of young Polish women ( = 1,032). The Vitamin D intake was assessed while using the validated Vitamin D Estimation Only-Food Frequency Questionnaire (VIDEO-FFQ) and was compared with the recommended 10 µg. The median Vitamin D intake in the study group was 3.09 µg (0.00-24.52 µg) and in 95% of participants was lower than recommended, while the highest Vitamin D intake was observed for the following sources: eggs (0.50 µg), meat and meat products (0.49 µg), herring, sardine and tuna products (0.41 µg) and dairy products (0.40 µg). The correlation between total Vitamin D intake and its intake from its sources was strongest for eggs ( < 0.0001; R = 0.5989) and for herring, sardine and tuna products ( < 0.0001; R = 0.5314), while the correlation between total Vitamin D intake and the number of servings was strongest for herring, sardine and tuna products ( < 0.0001; R = 0.5314). At the same time, while compared with other fish species, consuming herring was the strongest predictor of meeting the recommended Vitamin D level of 10 µg ( = 0.0292; odds ratio (OR) = 1.94; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-3.52), but also of 5 µg ( < 0.0001; OR = 2.54; 95% CI 1.85-3.47). Therefore, taking into account the relatively low prices of herring, its high Vitamin D content, as well as its influence on total Vitamin D intake, it could be beneficial to recommend young women to increase herring intake in order to increase dietary Vitamin D intake and to meet its recommendations.

Keywords

References

  1. Eur J Nutr. 2018 Jun;57(4):1357-1368 [PMID: 28289868]
  2. Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig. 2011;62(3):335-42 [PMID: 22171526]
  3. Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig. 2009;60(1):59-64 [PMID: 19579771]
  4. Nutrients. 2018 Oct 13;10(10): [PMID: 30322118]
  5. Food Nutr Res. 2009 Nov 12;53: [PMID: 20011225]
  6. Physiol Rev. 2016 Jan;96(1):365-408 [PMID: 26681795]
  7. J Nutr. 2005 Feb;135(2):310-6 [PMID: 15671233]
  8. Public Health Nutr. 2010 Jun;13(6A):920-4 [PMID: 20513261]
  9. Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig. 2012;63(4):441-6 [PMID: 23631265]
  10. BMJ. 2017 Feb 15;356:i6583 [PMID: 28202713]
  11. Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig. 2010;61(3):295-306 [PMID: 21365867]
  12. JAMA. 2005 May 11;293(18):2257-64 [PMID: 15886381]
  13. Am J Prev Med. 2007 Mar;32(3):210-6 [PMID: 17296473]
  14. PLoS Med. 2019 Sep 11;16(9):e1002907 [PMID: 31509529]
  15. Forum Nutr. 2009;62:1-405 [PMID: 20081327]
  16. Int Urol Nephrol. 2019 May;51(5):851-858 [PMID: 30737643]
  17. Neurology. 2012 Sep 25;79(13):1397-405 [PMID: 23008220]
  18. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2020 Jan 17;33(1):107-118 [PMID: 31942873]
  19. J Nutr. 2010 Jul;140(7):1280-6 [PMID: 20484545]
  20. Maturitas. 2010 Mar;65(3):225-36 [PMID: 20031348]
  21. BMJ. 2008 Jun 14;336(7657):1318-9 [PMID: 18556276]
  22. Adv Nutr. 2018 Jan 1;9(1):9-20 [PMID: 29438455]
  23. Public Health Nutr. 2002 Dec;5(6B):1273-85 [PMID: 12639232]
  24. Nutrients. 2018 Sep 10;10(9): [PMID: 30201901]
  25. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011 Jan;6(1):50-62 [PMID: 20876671]
  26. J Agric Food Chem. 2008 Feb 13;56(3):989-97 [PMID: 18179170]
  27. Sci Rep. 2018 Jun 13;8(1):9039 [PMID: 29899554]
  28. Int J Mol Sci. 2018 Jan 02;19(1): [PMID: 29301284]
  29. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Dec 2;2(12):e1917789 [PMID: 31860103]
  30. Nutrition. 2013 Jul-Aug;29(7-8):1048-53 [PMID: 23759266]
  31. J Nutr. 2010 Apr;140(4):817-22 [PMID: 20181782]
  32. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018 Nov;6(11):847-858 [PMID: 30293909]
  33. Eur J Nutr. 2016 Mar;55(2):759-769 [PMID: 25893715]
  34. Nutr Bull. 2014 Dec;39(4):322-350 [PMID: 25635171]
  35. Nutrients. 2016 Jan 05;8(1): [PMID: 26742070]
  36. Br J Psychiatry. 2013 Feb;202:100-7 [PMID: 23377209]
  37. J Am Diet Assoc. 2010 Apr;110(4):498 [PMID: 20338270]
  38. J Osteoporos. 2019 Nov 4;2019:9214926 [PMID: 31885852]
  39. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Apr;87(4):1080S-6S [PMID: 18400738]
  40. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2008 Mar;68(3):466-72 [PMID: 17941903]
  41. Med Sci Monit. 2019 Jan 23;25:666-674 [PMID: 30672512]
  42. J Am Diet Assoc. 1981 Nov;79(5):542-7 [PMID: 7288060]
  43. Adv Nutr. 2013 Jul 01;4(4):453-62 [PMID: 23858093]
  44. BMJ. 2019 Aug 12;366:l4673 [PMID: 31405892]
  45. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011 Aug;25(4):585-91 [PMID: 21872800]
  46. Nutrients. 2015 Apr 03;7(4):2485-98 [PMID: 25854833]
  47. BMJ. 2009 Oct 01;339:b3692 [PMID: 19797342]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0Dintake0vitaminµg=productsherringwomenfishsourcesyoungPolish1<0001recommendationsstudysamplingrecommended95%sardinetunatotalstrongestRcommonlymajoralsomeetsamplePolandVitamincompared1052eggsmeatcorrelation5314speciesORCIincreasemetresultsfactrarelyconsumedConsequentlyreliableestimationhabitualdifficultdailyhighlyvariableaimanalyzefoodpossibilitypopulation-basedconductedaged15-30yearsrecruitedcooperationlocalstudents'youthorganizationsregionsconveniencesnowballeffectstratifiedprocedureappliedrandomquotavoivodeshipsadministrativesubdivisionobtainadequatedistributionregardinggeneralpopulation032assessedusingvalidatedEstimationOnly-FoodFrequencyQuestionnaireVIDEO-FFQmediangroup30900-24participantslowerhighestobservedfollowingsources:504941dairy405989numberservingstimeconsumingpredictormeetinglevel0292oddsratio94confidenceinterval07-3525485-347ThereforetakingaccountrelativelylowpriceshighcontentwellinfluencebeneficialrecommendorderdietaryIntakePopulation-BasedSampleYoungWomenMajorSourcesPossibilityMeetingRecommendationsdiet

Similar Articles

Cited By (6)