Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32855521›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2021

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

Dana Hawwash, Wim Pinxten, Jessica E Raneri, Patrick Kolsteren, Carl Lachat

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Dana HawwashDepartment of Food Technology, Safety and Health, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7053-8488
Wim PinxtenFaculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.
Jessica E RaneriDepartment of Food Technology, Safety and Health, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium.
Patrick KolsterenDepartment of Food Technology, Safety and Health, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium.
Carl LachatDepartment of Food Technology, Safety and Health, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium. carl.lachat@ugent.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1389-8855

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess how priority setting exercises for nutrition research are considered in publication.

designCross-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.

participantsTwenty-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.

resultsHalf 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.

conclusionsPriority 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.

Indexed as

Health PrioritiesResearch DesignCross-Sectional StudiesExerciseHumansSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.