Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35802522›Full record

ArticleAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2022

Valuing the Diversity of Research Methods to Advance Nutrition Science.

Richard D Mattes, Sylvia B Rowe, Sarah D Ohlhorst, Andrew W Brown, Daniel J Hoffman, DeAnn J Liska, Edith J M Feskens, Jaapna Dhillon, Katherine L Tucker, Leonard H Epstein and 8 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 14 institutions in 3 countries.

Richard D MattesPurdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Sylvia B RoweSR Strategy, Washington, DC, USA.
Sarah D OhlhorstASN, Rockville, MD, USA.
Andrew W BrownIndiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Daniel J HoffmanRutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
DeAnn J LiskaTexas A&M AgriLife Research, College Station, TX, USA.
Edith J M FeskensWageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Jaapna DhillonUniversity of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA.
Katherine L TuckerUniversity of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, USA.
Leonard H EpsteinUniversity at Buffalo Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Lynnette M NeufeldGlobal Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN), Geneva, Switzerland.
Michael KelleyMichael Kelley Nutrition Science Consulting, Wauwatosa, WI, USA.
Naomi K FukagawaUSDA Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center, Beltsville, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5954-9039
Roger A SundeUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Steven H ZeiselUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9282-161X
Anthony J BasileArizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Laura E BorthUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Emahlea JacksonUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USAmerican Society for Nutrition · USArizona State University · USBeltsville Human Nutrition Research Center · USGlobal Alliance for Improved Nutrition · CHIndiana University Bloomington · USJacobs Institute · USPurdue University West Lafayette · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USUniversity of Massachusetts Lowell · USUniversity of Missouri · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of Washington · USWageningen University & Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ASN Board of Directors appointed the Nutrition Research Task Force to develop a report on scientific methods used in nutrition science to advance discovery, interpretation, and application of knowledge in the field. The genesis of this report was growing concern about the tone of discourse among nutrition professionals and the implications of acrimony on the productive study and translation of nutrition science. Too often, honest differences of opinion are cast as conflicts instead of areas of needed collaboration. Recognition of the value (and limitations) of contributions from well-executed nutrition science derived from the various approaches used in the discipline, as well as appreciation of how their layering will yield the strongest evidence base, will provide a basis for greater productivity and impact. Greater collaborative efforts within the field of nutrition science will require an understanding that each method or approach has a place and function that should be valued and used together to create the nutrition evidence base. Precision nutrition was identified as an important emerging nutrition topic by the preponderance of task force members, and this theme was adopted for the report because it lent itself to integration of many approaches in nutrition science. Although the primary audience for this report is nutrition researchers and other nutrition professionals, a secondary aim is to develop a document useful for the various audiences that translate nutrition research, including journalists, clinicians, and policymakers. The intent is to promote accurate, transparent, verifiable evidence-based communication about nutrition science. This will facilitate reasoned interpretation and application of emerging findings and, thereby, improve understanding and trust in nutrition science and appropriate characterization, development, and adoption of recommendations.

Indexed as

Nutritional SciencesResearch DesignAdvisory CommitteesHumansevidence basemethodsnutrition scienceprecision nutritionresearchtranslation

Identifiers

PMID35802522
PMCPMC9340992
OpenAlexW4225343776

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.