Uptake and impact of priority setting exercises in nutrition research publications.

OBJECTIVE: To assess how priority setting exercises for nutrition research are considered in publication. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. SETTINGS: First, a citation analysis of priority setting exercises found in nutrition research until 2019 was conducted. The reasons for citation were extracted from the text of citing papers and the reasons were defined as: (i) acting on the research questions identified as priorities, (ii) acknowledging the priority setting exercise, (iii) using the same method, or (iv) previous knowledge to support evidence. Second, a survey with authors of the priority setting exercises was done to understand priority setters' perspectives on the impact and satisfaction of their work. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-one priority setting exercise papers were included. In all, 434 citing papers were found, of which 338 were considered in the citation analysis. A sample of 17 authors representing 13 priority setting exercise papers completed the impact and satisfaction survey. RESULTS: Half of the priority setting exercise papers were published by 2013. After excluding self-citations (n = 60), the priority setting papers had on average 18 citations. Priority setting exercises had a median of 1 (IQR = 0-1) citing manuscript that acted on the recommendations produced from priority setting exercises. Authors of the priority setting exercises expressed a desire for increased uptake of the results of the priority setting exercises by funding agencies. Key barriers for uptake were identified as challenges in involving stakeholders and the general public for participation in the priority setting exercise. CONCLUSIONS: Priority settings exercises are important efforts to guide nutrition research toward effective allocation of resources. However, there seems to be a limited consideration of these priority setting exercises in research papers.

Pathways to Diverse Diets-a Retrospective Analysis of a Participatory Nutrition-Sensitive Project in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: There is a current need for better understanding the impact of nutrition-sensitive agriculture interventions. This study is based on a community-based participatory project that diversified diets of women and children by making use of local food biodiversity. This retrospective impact pathway analysis aims at explaining why and how impact was reached. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to understand how a nutrition-sensitive agriculture project improved people's diets by analyzing the pathways from agriculture to nutrition. It also aimed to test theoretical pathways by comparing the documented pathways with those from a widely used framework from the literature. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted in 2019 through 10 semistructured focus group discussions with community members engaging in the project and 5 key informant interviews with local authorities that worked with these communities during the project. Summative content analysis was used to identify pathways through which the project affected diets of beneficiaries. The defined pathways were compared with the pathways of the widely used Tackling the Agriculture-Nutrition Disconnect in India (TANDI) framework from the literature. RESULTS: Out of the agriculture-nutrition pathways that are presented in the literature, 3 were found in the responses: 1) food from own production; 2) income from sale of foods produced; and 3) women's empowerment through access to and control over resources. In addition, 5 other pathways were identified and indicated spillover effects from the intervention to the control participants, increased nutrition knowledge, improved health, savings, and empowerment and harmony in the household. CONCLUSIONS: Pathway analysis in nutrition-sensitive agriculture can provide valuable understanding on how and why dietary improvements have been achieved in an intervention. The approach can hence be instrumental in addressing the current demand within the field on understanding the progress and impact of interventions. Pathway analysis also helps to address knowledge gaps regarding theoretical frameworks, as in the present study, concerning women empowerment pathways.

Perspective: Towards Automated Tracking of Content and Evidence Appraisal of Nutrition Research.

Robust recommendations for healthy diets and nutrition require careful synthesis of available evidence. Given the increasing volume of research articles generated, the retrieval and synthesis of evidence are increasingly becoming laborious and time-consuming. Information technology could help to reduce workload for humans. To guide supervised learning however, human identification of key study characteristics is necessary. Reporting guidelines recommend that authors include essential content in articles and could generate manually labeled training data for automated evidence retrieval and synthesis. Here, we present a semiautomated approach to annotate, link, and track the content of nutrition research manuscripts. We used the STROBE extension for nutritional epidemiology (STROBE-nut) reporting guidelines to manually annotate a sample of 15 articles and converted the semantic information into linked data in a Neo4j graph database through an automated process. Six summary statistics were computed to estimate the reporting completeness of the articles. The content structure, presence of essential study characteristics as well as the reporting completeness of the articles are visualized automatically from the graph database. The archived linked data are interoperable through their annotations and relations. A graph database with linked data on essential study characteristics can enable Natural Language Processing in nutrition.

The addition of STROBE-nut to the EJCN instructions to authors: some considerations and caveats.

Inadequate reporting in nutritional epidemiology study has important downstream consequences for the public and the reputation of the nutrition research. Poor reporting of nutritional studies can have serious implications on knowledge transfer, public health policy, and research. In addition, it is a significant and avoidable source of research waste. The STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-nutritional epidemiology (STROBE-nut) statement comprises a set of 24 items, organised as a checklist, with minimal information to be included in manuscripts describing findings of nutritional epidemiology research and dietary assessment. The goal of STROBE-nut is to ensure all information is available to enable quality appraisal, correct understanding, effective replication and application of findings. It has been suggested that robust implementation of reporting guidelines will translate into more complete reported research. Furthermore systematic use of reporting guidelines can indirectly improve the methodological qualities of research papers. In this regard, if STROBE-nut becomes a common practice between the community of nutritionist and epidemiologist, it can enhance the quality of the nutritional epidemiology field output. We thus suggest the endorsement of STROBE-nut at the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

Usefulness of applying research reporting guidelines as Writing Aid software: a crossover randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the intention of using a Writing Aid software, which integrates four research reporting guidelines (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-nutritional epidemiology) and their Elaboration & Explanation (E&E) documents during the write-up of research in Microsoft Word compared with current practices. DESIGN: Two-arms crossover randomised controlled trial with no blinding and no washout period. SETTING: Face-to-face or online sessions. PARTICIPANTS: 54 (28 in arm 1 and 26 in arm 2) doctoral and postdoctoral researchers. INTERVENTIONS: Reporting guidelines and their E&E document were randomly administered as Writing Aid or as Word documents in a single 30 min to 1 hour session, with a short break before crossing over to the other study intervention. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Using the Technology Acceptance Model, we assessed the primary outcome: the difference in the mean of intention of use; and secondary outcomes: the difference in mean perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. The three outcomes were measured using questions with a 7-point Likert-scale. Secondary analysis using structural equation modelling (SEM) was applied to explore the relationships between the outcomes. RESULTS: No significant difference in reported intention of use (mean difference and 95% CI 0.25 (-0.05 to 0.55), p=0.10), and perceived usefulness (mean difference and 95% CI 0.19 (-0.04 to 0.41), p=0.10). The Writing Aid performed significantly better than the word document on researchers' perceived ease of use (mean difference and 95% CI 0.59 (0.29 to 0.89), p<0.001). In the SEM analysis, participants' intention of using the tools was indirectly affected by perceived ease of use (beta 0.53 p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Despite no significant difference in the intention of use between the tools, administering reporting guidelines as Writing Aid is perceived as easier to use, offering a possibility to further explore its applicability to enhance reporting adherence.

An Ontology to Standardize Research Output of Nutritional Epidemiology: From Paper-Based Standards to Linked Content.

BACKGROUND: The use of linked data in the Semantic Web is a promising approach to add value to nutrition research. An ontology, which defines the logical relationships between well-defined taxonomic terms, enables linking and harmonizing research output. To enable the description of domain-specific output in nutritional epidemiology, we propose the Ontology for Nutritional Epidemiology (ONE) according to authoritative guidance for nutritional epidemiology. METHODS: Firstly, a scoping review was conducted to identify existing ontology terms for reuse in ONE. Secondly, existing data standards and reporting guidelines for nutritional epidemiology were converted into an ontology. The terms used in the standards were summarized and listed separately in a taxonomic hierarchy. Thirdly, the ontologies of the nutritional epidemiologic standards, reporting guidelines, and the core concepts were gathered in ONE. Three case studies were included to illustrate potential applications: (i) annotation of existing manuscripts and data, (ii) ontology-based inference, and (iii) estimation of reporting completeness in a sample of nine manuscripts. RESULTS: Ontologies for "food and nutrition" (n = 37), "disease and specific population" (n = 100), "data description" (n = 21), "research description" (n = 35), and "supplementary (meta) data description" (n = 44) were reviewed and listed. ONE consists of 339 classes: 79 new classes to describe data and 24 new classes to describe the content of manuscripts. CONCLUSION: ONE is a resource to automate data integration, searching, and browsing, and can be used to assess reporting completeness in nutritional epidemiology.

Reducing waste in nutritional epidemiology: review and perspectives.

We discuss efforts in improving the value of nutrition research. We organised the paper in five research stages: Stage 1: research priority setting; Stage 2: research design, conduct and analysis; Stage 3: research regulation and management; Stage 4: research accessibility and Stage 5: research reporting and publishing. Along the stages of the research cycle, varied initiatives exist to improve the quality and added value of nutrition research. However, efforts are focused on single stages of the research cycle without vision of the research system as a whole. Although research on nutrition research has been limited, it has potential to improve the quality of nutrition research and develop new tools and instruments for this purpose. A comprehensive assessment of the magnitude of research waste in nutrition and consensus on priority actions is needed. The nutrition research community at large needs to have open discussions on the usefulness of these tools and lead suitable efforts to enhance nutrition research across the stages of the research cycle. Capacity building is essential and considerations of nutrition research quality are vital to be integrated in training efforts of nutrition researchers.

Perspective: Consideration of Values When Setting Priorities in Nutrition Research: Guidance for Transparency.

Nutrition research can guide interventions to tackle the burden of diet-related diseases. Setting priorities in nutrition research, however, requires the engagement of various stakeholders with diverse insights. Consideration of what matters most in research from a scientific, social, and ethical perspective is therefore not an automatic process. Systematic ways to explicitly define and consider relevant values are largely lacking. Here, we review existing nutrition research priority-setting exercises, analyze how values are reported, and provide guidance for transparent consideration of values while setting priorities in nutrition research. Of the 27 (n = 22 peer-reviewed manuscripts and 5 grey literature documents) studies reviewed, 40.7% used a combination of different methods, 59.3% described the represented stakeholders, and 49.1% reported on follow-up activities. All priority-setting exercises were led by research groups based in high-income countries. Via an iterative qualitative content analysis, reported values were identified (n = 22 manuscripts). Three clusters of values (i.e., those related to impact, feasibility, and accountability) were identified. These values were organized in a tool to help those involved in setting research priorities systematically consider and report values. The tool was finalized through an online consultation with 7 international stakeholders. The value-oriented tool for priority setting in nutrition research identifies and presents values that are already implicitly and explicitly represented in priority-setting exercises. It provides guidance to enable explicit deliberation on research priorities from an ethical perspective. In addition, it can serve as a reporting tool to document how value-laden choices are made during priority setting and help foster the accountability of stakeholders involved.

Perspective: An Extension of the STROBE Statement for Observational Studies in Nutritional Epidemiology (STROBE-nut): Explanation and Elaboration.

Nutritional epidemiology is an inherently complex and multifaceted research area. Dietary intake is a complex exposure and is challenging to describe and assess, and links between diet, health, and disease are difficult to ascertain. Consequently, adequate reporting is necessary to facilitate comprehension, interpretation, and generalizability of results and conclusions. The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement is an international and collaborative initiative aiming to enhance the quality of reporting of observational studies. We previously presented a checklist of 24 reporting recommendations for the field of nutritional epidemiology, called "the STROBE-nut." The STROBE-nut is an extension of the general STROBE statement, intended to complement the STROBE recommendations to improve and standardize the reporting in nutritional epidemiology. The aim of the present article is to explain the rationale for, and elaborate on, the STROBE-nut recommendations to enhance the clarity and to facilitate the understanding of the guidelines. Examples from the published literature are used as illustrations, and references are provided for further reading.

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-Nutritional Epidemiology (STROBE-nut): An Extension of the STROBE Statement.

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised about the quality of reporting in nutritional epidemiology. Research reporting guidelines such as the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement can improve quality of reporting in observational studies. Herein, we propose recommendations for reporting nutritional epidemiology and dietary assessment research by extending the STROBE statement into Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-Nutritional Epidemiology (STROBE-nut). METHODS AND FINDINGS: Recommendations for the reporting of nutritional epidemiology and dietary assessment research were developed following a systematic and consultative process, coordinated by a multidisciplinary group of 21 experts. Consensus on reporting guidelines was reached through a three-round Delphi consultation process with 53 external experts. In total, 24 recommendations for nutritional epidemiology were added to the STROBE checklist. CONCLUSION: When used appropriately, reporting guidelines for nutritional epidemiology can contribute to improve reporting of observational studies with a focus on diet and health.