Dana Hawwash1, Wim Pinxten2, Jessica E Raneri1, Patrick Kolsteren1, Carl Lachat3. 1. Department of Food Technology, Safety and Health, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium. 2. Faculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium. 3. Department of Food Technology, Safety and Health, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium. carl.lachat@ugent.be.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess how priority setting exercises for nutrition research are considered in publication. DESIGN: Cross-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. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-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. RESULTS: Half 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. CONCLUSIONS: Priority 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.
OBJECTIVE: To assess how priority setting exercises for nutrition research are considered in publication. DESIGN: Cross-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. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-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. RESULTS: Half 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. CONCLUSIONS: Priority 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.
Authors: Kenneth H Brown; Sonja Y Hess; Erick Boy; Rosalind S Gibson; Susan Horton; Saskia J Osendarp; Fernando Sempertegui; Roger Shrimpton; Igor Rudan Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2008-04-22 Impact factor: 4.022