Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36907514›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of clinical nutrition2023

Critical data at the crossroads: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey faces growing challenges.

Christine L Taylor, Jennifer H Madans, Nancy N Chapman, Catherine E Woteki, Ronette R Briefel, Johanna T Dwyer, Joyce M Merkel, Charles J Rothwell, David M Klurfeld, David S Seres and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2023. 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
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Workshop summary: building an NHANES for the future.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2024
    Article
  18. 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

11 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Christine L TaylorRetired, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, College Park, MD, USA and Chair, Committee on Advocacy and Science Policy, American Society for Nutrition, USA. Electronic address: sec@nutrition.org.
Jennifer H MadansRetired, National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD, USA.
Nancy N ChapmanN. Chapman Associates, Washington, DC, USA.
Catherine E WotekiDepartment of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
Ronette R BriefelRetired, Mathematica, Washington, DC, USA.
Johanna T DwyerTufts University School of Medicine and Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Boston, MA, USA.
Joyce M MerkelBillerica, MA, USA.
Charles J RothwellRetired, National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD, USA.
David M KlurfeldRetired, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Beltsville, MD, USA and Indiana University School of Public Health, Bloomington, IN, USA.
David S SeresInstitute of Human Nutrition and Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Paul M CoatesRetired, Office of Dietary Supplements, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA and Indiana University School of Public Health, Bloomington, IN, USA.
National Center for Health Statistics · USCenter for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USIowa State University · USMathematica Policy Research · USNational Institutes of Health · USTufts University · USUnited States Department of Agriculture · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

NHANES needs urgent attention to ensure its future, which is facing emerging challenges associated with data collection, stagnant funding that has undercut innovation, and the increased call for granular data for subpopulations and groups at risk. The concerns do not rest merely on securing more funding but focus on the need for a constructive review of the survey to explore new approaches and identify appropriate change. This white paper, developed under the auspices of the ASN's Committee on Advocacy and Science Policy (CASP), is a call to the nutrition community to advocate for and support activities to prepare NHANES for future success in a changing nutrition world. Furthermore, because NHANES is much more than a nutrition survey and serves the needs of many in health fields and even commercial arenas, effective advocacy must be grounded in alliances among the survey's diverse stakeholders so that the full range of expertise and interests can engage. This article highlights the complicated nature of the survey along with key overarching challenges to underscore the importance of a measured, thoughtful, comprehensive, and collaborative approach to considering the future of NHANES. Starting-point questions are identified for the purposes of focusing dialog, discussion forums, and research. In particular, the CASP calls for a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine study on NHANES to articulate an actionable framework for NHANES going forward. With a well-informed and integrated set of goals and recommendations that could be provided by such a study, a secure future for NHANES is more readily achievable.

Indexed as

Nutritional StatusHumansNutrition SurveysSurveys and Questionnaireshealth dataNASEMNHANESsurvey challenges

Identifiers

PMID36907514
PMCPMC10316367
OpenAlexW4323818370

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.