Skip to main content
. 2016 Sep 16;2016(9):CD010166. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010166.pub2

Thailand.

Methods Uncontrolled pre‐post
Participants National Nutrition Survey 1960: individuals from military and civilian populations living in households with children younger than 5 years of age
National Nutrition Survey 1975: individuals from military and civilian populations living in households with children younger than 5 years of age
National Nutrition Survey 2003: individuals from military and civilian populations living in households with children younger than 5 years of age
Report of sodium consumption in Thai diet survey 2008: unknown
Fourth Thai National Health Examination Survey 2008‐2009: multi‐stage, stratified random sample of individuals 15+ years of age based on population registers
Interventions Salt reduction initiative started in 2006. Efforts included:
  • public information/education campaign;

  • on‐package nutrition information;

  • food procurement policy in specific settings; and

  • food product reformulation.

Outcomes National Nutrition Survey 1960: mean sodium intake (grams/d) estimated via a dietary survey
National Nutrition Survey 1975: mean sodium intake (grams/d) estimated via a dietary survey
National Nutrition Survey 2003: mean sodium intake (grams/d) estimated via a dietary survey (food list recall and food frequency checklist of foods/condiments)
Report of sodium consumption in Thai diet survey 2008: mean sodium intake (grams/d) estimated via a dietary survey (household survey)
Fourth Thai National Health Examination Survey 2008‐2009: mean sodium intake (grams/d) estimated via a dietary survey (food list recall and food frequency checklist of foods/condiments)
Axes of inequality National Nutrition Survey 1960: none
National Nutrition Survey 1975: none
National Nutrition Survey 2003: none
Report of sodium consumption in Thai diet survey 2008: none
Fourth Thai National Health Examination Survey 2008‐2009: none
Sample size and response rate National Nutrition Survey 1960: sample size and response rate unknown
National Nutrition Survey 1975: sample size and response rate unknown
National Nutrition Survey 2003: sample size and response rate unknown
Report of sodium consumption in Thai diet survey 2008: sample size and response rate unknown
Fourth Thai National Health Examination Survey 2008‐2009: n = 20,450; 93.1% RR (overall survey)
Funding source / Conflict of Interest (COI) National Nutrition Survey 1960: funding source unknown/no COI statement provided
National Nutrition Survey 1975: funding source unknown/no COI statement provided
National Nutrition Survey 2003: funding source unknown/no COI statement provided
Report of sodium consumption in Thai diet survey 2008: funding source unknown/no COI statement provided
Fourth Thai National Health Examination Survey 2008‐2009: funding source unknown/no COI statement provided
Notes Sources of data points and references: see Thailand
National Nutrition Survey 1960 and 1975: *Supornsilaphachai C. Evolution of salt reduction initiatives in Thailand: lessons for other countries in the South‐East Asia Region. Regional Health Forum 2013;17(1):61‐71
National Nutrition Survey 2003 and report of sodium consumption in Thai diet survey 2008: Thailand country questionnaire 2014: *Supornsilaphachai 2013 (see full citation above)
Fourth Thai National Health Examination Survey 2008‐2009: Thailand country questionnaire 2014: *Supornsilaphachai 2013 (see full citation above): Aekplakorn W, Chariyalertsak S, Kessomboon P, Sangthong R, Inthawong R, Putwatana P, Taneepanichskul S, Thai National Health Examination Survey IV Study Group. Prevalence and management of diabetes and metabolic risk factors in Thai adults: The Thai National Health Examination Survey IV, 2009. Diabetes Care 2011;34(9):1980‐1985
*Indicates main publication used for in‐text citation purposes
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Sampling High risk Simple random sampling reported for only 1 data point (2007)
Confounding High risk Uncontrolled pre‐post designs always score 'high'
Reliability/validity of outcome measure Unclear risk Methods of measuring sodium levels were not described
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Pre‐existing data were used to evaluate the initiative
Representativeness of sample Unclear risk Not discussed
Selective reporting (reporting bias) High risk No estimates of variance (confidence intervals or standard deviations) were provided
Other bias Low risk No other obvious sources of bias to report