Cited by 252Trace Elements in HealthIron Metabolism and DisordersNutrition and Health Studies

Zinc Intake of the U.S. Population: Findings from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–1994

Open access
Briefel, Ronette R., Bialostosky, Karil, Kennedy-Stephenson, Jocelyn, McDowell, Margaret A., Ervin, R. Bethene, Wright, Jacqueline D.·2000·The Journal of Nutrition

Abstract

National survey data for 29,103 examinees in the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were used to estimate mean and percentile distributions of dietary and total zinc intakes based on 24-h dietary recalls and vitamin/supplement use. Mean daily total intakes ranged from 5.5 mg in non-breast-feeding infants to 13 mg in adults and were higher in adolescent and adult males than in females (P <0.01). Mean total zinc intakes (22 mg) were approximately 10 mg higher in pregnant and lactating females than in nonpregnant, nonlactating females of the same age. Mean total zinc intakes were 0. 7 mg higher in adolescents (11.1 mg) and 2.5-3.5 mg higher in adults (13 mg) compared with mean dietary intakes, indicating the average contribution of supplements to total zinc intake. Mean total zinc intakes were significantly higher in non-Hispanic whites than in non-Hispanic blacks (P<0.01) and Mexican Americans (P<0.01) for men and women aged 51-70 y and > or =71 y due to higher zinc supplement use. The prevalence of zinc-containing supplements use ranged from 0. 1% in infants to 20.5% in adults. "Adequate" zinc intake in this survey population was 55.6% based on total intakes of >77% of the 1989 recommended dietary allowance. Young children aged 1-3 y, adolescent females aged 12-19 y and persons aged > or =71 y were at the greatest risk of inadequate zinc intakes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jn/130.5.1367s

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The third NHANES found that elderly persons older than 71 years were at the greatest risk of inadequate zinc intake.

    “The third NHANES (1988–1914) also found that elderly persons (older than 71 y) were at the greatest risk of inadequate zinc intake (77).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Briefel, R. R., Bialostosky, K., Kennedy-Stephenson, J., McDowell, M. A., Ervin, R. B., & Wright, J. D.
Affiliations
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • TRW (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Briefel, Ronette R.
Venue
The Journal of Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-05
Volume
130
Issue
5
Pages
1367S-1373S
ISSN
0022-3166 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1901597891
Cited by
252
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 16
FWCI
8.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Trace Elements in Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Iron Metabolism and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutrition and Health Studies
Keywords
zinc intake, dietary zinc, zinc supplements, nutritional adequacy, RDA, pregnant and lactating women, adolescents, older adults, racial and ethnic differences, sex differences, NHANES III
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Child, Child, Preschool, Diet, Female, Humans, Infant, Male, Middle Aged, Nutrition Surveys, Population Surveillance, Pregnancy, United States, Zinc, Age Distribution, Sex Distribution, Nutrition Policy, Dietary Supplements

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review