ArticleEuropean journal of nutrition2025
The European nutrition research landscape: diversity and perspectives.
Article in European journal of nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe diversification of Nutrition Sciences (NS) in recent decades has highlighted the need to review current practices in relation to funding, communication and interaction with stakeholders. The Federation of European Nutrition Societies (FENS) Presidential Activity “Improving standards in the science of nutrition” established three working groups to develop consensus documents. This paper is part of Working Group 2 (WG2) “Organisation, Capabilities and Funding” and aims at describing the European Nutrition Research Landscape, addressing its diversity, challenges and future perspectives.
methodsWG2 developed two rounds of questionnaires designed to map the current funding architecture in FENS member countries. Questionnaires were administered to representatives of national NS member societies in 2022 and desk research was carried out to describe the main European Union (EU) sources of funding. Qualitative data analysis was performed on questionnaire data collected and agreed and approved by WG2.
results42% of representatives responded to the first round of data collection, and 30% to the second round of data collection. Results indicate that the NS field is mainly funded by public agencies, private actors, and by contract. Most calls are multi-disciplinary and the majority of societies were aware of risks posed by engagement with the private sector and financial conflicts of interest (COI).
conclusionThis exercise provides an insight into the funding landscape across Europe for NS and highlights the uniquely multifaceted funding sources and dynamics across the continent. This work also underscores the challenges NS faces and progress made with issues surrounding COI and the associated reputation of NS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40676332What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.