Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39213298›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Development of a standardized consensus lexicon for terms related to micronutrient programs.

Lwin Mar Hlaing, Megan W Bourassa, Kenneth H Brown, Reed Atkin, Saskia J M Osendarp, Aishani Gupta, Sonja Y Hess

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Lwin Mar HlaingThe Micronutrient Forum, Washington, DC, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7944-2009
Megan W BourassaThe Micronutrient Forum, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Kenneth H BrownThe Micronutrient Forum, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Reed AtkinThe Micronutrient Forum, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Saskia J M OsendarpThe Micronutrient Forum, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Aishani GuptaIndependent Regulatory Expert, Canada.
Sonja Y HessThe Micronutrient Forum, Washington, DC, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4661-277X

Funding

Gates Foundation INV-036678
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inconsistent use of terminology among diverse stakeholders hinders effective communication in micronutrient programs, especially large-scale food fortification (LSFF) which involves stakeholders from different sectors. To align the terminology use, the Micronutrient Data Innovation Alliance (DInA) of the Micronutrient Forum (MNF) created a lexicon of terms related to LSFF and other micronutrient programs. The purpose of this lexicon is to establish a central repository of consensus definitions of key terms to facilitate communication among diverse stakeholders involved in micronutrient programs including public and private sectors, donor agencies, food industries, academic institutions, etc. This paper describes the methodology of lexicon development. Important terms related to micronutrient programs were compiled from multiple sources, including United Nations agencies, program implementation and technical support agencies, relevant websites, and scientific literature. The selection of terms was guided by key micronutrient interventions (fortification, supplementation, dietary diversification) and the program cycle (assessment, planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation). Definitions of terms were identified from these references and checked for consistency across different sources. For terms with multiple definitions, a modified Delphi method was applied to harmonize the definitions. The first draft lexicon (n = 113 terms) was reviewed by six experts from the University of California, Davis (UCD) and MNF, and second draft (n = 115 terms) was shared with 24 global micronutrient experts for feedback. Fifty-four terms were found to have multiple definitions. Of which, minor modification was made for 12-terms with nominal difference and remaining 42-terms were shared with over 140 micronutrient-experts disseminated via an online survey through newsletters and emails to solicit experts' opinions on the most appropriate definition or a modified one. Nineteen legal terms and 83 micronutrient terms (n = 102 terms) were subsequently added. Overall, 39 experts from diverse areas of expertise (LSFF, micronutrient program planning and implementation, surveys and research, policy development, food industry regulations, food safety, and public health nutrition) participated in the online survey. The terms with >75% agreement among experts were considered as final, while the remaining were reviewed again by experts from UCD and MNF until consensus was reached on harmonized definitions. The current lexicon is available online at the DInA-website. and contains 217 terms and will be maintained as a "living document". The lexicon will facilitate the ability of key stakeholders of micronutrient programs to evaluate and compare program performance in order to make informed decisions on how to ensure future progress in reducing micronutrient deficiencies.

Indexed as

MicronutrientsTerminology as TopicDelphi TechniqueFood, FortifiedHumansMicronutrients

Identifiers

PMID39213298
PMCPMC11364245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.