2013
DOI: 10.1017/s1368980013002929
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Vitamin D intakes of adults differ by income, gender and race/ethnicity in the USA, 2007 to 2010

Abstract: Objective: To determine if dietary, supplemental and total vitamin D intakes in the USA are influenced by income, race/ethnicity or gender. Design: Cross-sectional. US vitamin D intakes were estimated by poverty income ratio (PIR), race/ethnicity and gender using 24 h dietary intake recalls and dietary supplement use questionnaires. Statistical analyses of weighted data were performed using SAS (version 9?2) to estimate means and their standard errors. Race and ethnic intake differences controlling for PIR, ge… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
22
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
22
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In this context, fish/fish products contributed less to the vitamin D intake of subjects with a monthly household net income of ≥1,500 € compared to subjects who reported a lower income, whereas in the upper income group, a higher percentage of dietary vitamin D was provided by the food category ‘fats/oils’. In contrast to some previous studies (15, 16), in which income was a positive predictor of vitamin D intake, household income was inversely associated with vitamin D intake in our subjects. However, despite a lower intake level, serum 25(OH)D 3 concentrations were higher in the upper income class, although the self-reported time spent outdoors and the proportion of supplement users did not differ between these two income groups ( p> 0.05).…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In this context, fish/fish products contributed less to the vitamin D intake of subjects with a monthly household net income of ≥1,500 € compared to subjects who reported a lower income, whereas in the upper income group, a higher percentage of dietary vitamin D was provided by the food category ‘fats/oils’. In contrast to some previous studies (15, 16), in which income was a positive predictor of vitamin D intake, household income was inversely associated with vitamin D intake in our subjects. However, despite a lower intake level, serum 25(OH)D 3 concentrations were higher in the upper income class, although the self-reported time spent outdoors and the proportion of supplement users did not differ between these two income groups ( p> 0.05).…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…In the United States and Canada, milk, meat, and fish are the leading food sources of vitamin D (7, 15), while in the United Kingdom, these are fish, meat, cereals, and fat spreads (34). In Japan, fish intake is by far the main contributor followed by eggs and mushrooms (35).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We speculate that individuals in the higher socioeconomic strata are more likely to be in white-collar professions (e.g., office workers, lawyers) that largely conduct business indoors, hence limiting sunlight exposure. However, these individuals may also be more likely to take vitamin D supplements [32]. These findings must therefore be taken with caution as we did not collect dietary or supplement information, hence necessitating future cohort studies to validate our findings.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…20,21 The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data show that neither Hispanic nor nonHispanic white women consume the recommended amount of vitamin D through diet, an important nutrient for calcium absorption and bone health. 22 However, non-Hispanic white women are more likely to supplement vitamin D to meet requirements than Hispanic women. Finally, adequate dietary protein intake is important to maintain bone health.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%