Developmental Process and Early Phases of Implementation for the US Interagency Committee on Human Nutrition Research National Nutrition Research Roadmap 2016–2021

Fleischhacker, Sheila; Ballard, Rachel; Starke–Reed, Pamela; Galuska, Deborah A.; Neuhouser, Marian L.

doi:10.3945/jn.117.255943

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Reorienting Public Agricultural Investmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An example entry point to link public health to agricultural and environmental outcomes are initiatives like the Interagency Committee on Human Nutrition Research (ICHNR), charged with improving coordination across federal agencies engaged in funding and conducting nutrition research over 2016-2021 (Fleischhacker et al, 2017). Among their research priorities were the "[development of monitoring systems and data systems]... to evaluate change in nutritional and health status, as well as in the food supply, composition, and consumption" and "... interdisciplinary research [to] identify effective approaches to enhance the environmental sustainability of healthy eating patterns" (Fleischhacker et al, 2017). To the extent that this committee can facilitate inter-agency coordination, their work should continue into the foreseeable future and also consider how current federal agricultural spending, research and otherwise, may be redistributed to enhance these lines of research and build new emphases on crops and cropping systems for planetary health.…”

Section: Reorienting Public Agricultural Investmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Closing Research Investment Gaps for a Global Food Transformation

Bollington

DeLonge

Mungra³

et al. 2021

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent calls for a global food transformation have centered on simultaneously improving human and environmental health, recognizing that food and nutrient diversity have declined over time while food systems have exacted a heavy climate and ecological toll. Grain legumes and coarse grain crops provide important human nutrition and environmental benefits, but the production and consumption of many of these crops remains relatively low compared to major commodities, such as maize, wheat, rice, and soy. Outstanding hurdles to scaling up these “minor commodity” crops include (among other things) their relatively lower yields, and lower farmer adoption, based partly on actual or perceived profitability and marketability. We hypothesize that these limitations are attributable in part to unequal funding for these crops' research and development (R&D) both on a national and global scale. In the United States, we show that investment patterns for a snapshot of USDA-funded research grants from 2008 to 2019 consistently favor major commodity crops, which received 3 to 4.5 times more funding and 3 to 5 times as many grants than the minor commodity crop groups. This current USDA funding allocation poses a barrier to food system transformations. Achieving nutritious diets for planetary health requires more public agricultural investment toward minor commodity crops and increased collaboration between public health, nutrition, agriculture, and environmental sectors.

show abstract

Section: Reorienting Public Agricultural Investmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reorienting Public Agricultural Investmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Closing Research Investment Gaps for a Global Food Transformation

Bollington

DeLonge

Mungra³

et al. 2021

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, the Roadmap lacked any prioritization between the 120 identified initiatives, due to variable and nonharmonized funding criteria, priorities, and capacities across federal, nonprofit, and private-sector research agencies in the US and globally. This may be why a 2017 analysis found only early signs of implementation of the Roadmap among ICHNR member departments and agencies ( 163 ). ICHNR recognized that further engagement with the extramural scientific community and leveraging existing or new public–private partnerships would be important to achieving the Roadmap's goals ( 163 ).…”

Section: Current Efforts For Cross-governmental Nutrition Research Comentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This may be why a 2017 analysis found only early signs of implementation of the Roadmap among ICHNR member departments and agencies ( 163 ). ICHNR recognized that further engagement with the extramural scientific community and leveraging existing or new public–private partnerships would be important to achieving the Roadmap's goals ( 163 ). Currently, ICHNR has a narrower focus, meeting about twice per year to discuss the DGAs, DRIs, and a potential new federal database of nutrition research projects.…”

Section: Current Efforts For Cross-governmental Nutrition Research Comentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening national nutrition research: rationale and options for a new coordinated federal research effort and authority

Fleischhacker

Woteki

Coates

et al. 2020

The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The US faces remarkable food and nutrition challenges. A new federal effort to strengthen and coordinate nutrition research could rapidly generate the evidence base needed to address these multiple national challenges. However, the relevant characteristics of such an effort have been uncertain. Objectives Our aim was to provide an objective, informative summary of 1) the mounting diet-related health burdens facing our nation and corresponding economic, health equity, national security, and sustainability implications; 2) the current federal nutrition research landscape and existing mechanisms for its coordination; 3) the opportunities for and potential impact of new fundamental, clinical, public health, food and agricultural, and translational scientific discoveries; and 4) the various options for further strengthening and coordinating federal nutrition research, including corresponding advantages, disadvantages, and potential executive and legislative considerations. Methods We reviewed government and other published documents on federal nutrition research; held various discussions with expert groups, advocacy organizations, and scientific societies; and held in-person or phone meetings with >50 federal staff in executive and legislative roles, as well as with a variety of other stakeholders in academic, industry, and nongovernment organizations. Results Stark national nutrition challenges were identified. More Americans are sick than are healthy, largely from rising diet-related illnesses. These conditions create tremendous strains on productivity, health care costs, health disparities, government budgets, US economic competitiveness, and military readiness. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has further laid bare these strains, including food insecurity, major diet-related comorbidities for poor outcomes from COVID-19 such as diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, and insufficient surveillance on and coordination of our food system. More than 10 federal departments and agencies currently invest in critical nutrition research, yet with relatively flat investments over several decades. Coordination also remains suboptimal, documented by multiple governmental reports over 50 years. Greater harmonization and expansion of federal investment in nutrition science, not a silo-ing or rearrangement of existing investments, has tremendous potential to generate new discoveries to improve and sustain the health of all Americans. Two identified key strategies to achieve this were as follows: 1) a new authority for robust cross-governmental coordination of nutrition research and other nutrition-related policy and 2) strengthened authority, investment, and coordination for nutrition research within the NIH. These strategies were found to be complementary, together catalyzing important new science, partnerships, coordination, and returns on investment. Additional complementary actions to accelerate federal nutrition research were identified at the USDA. Conclusions The need and opportunities for strengthened federal nutrition research are clear, with specific identified options to help create the new leadership, strategic planning, coordination, and investment the nation requires to address the multiple nutrition-related challenges and grasp the opportunities before us.

show abstract

“…The importance of continuously monitoring, and updating information on, the nutrition intake of U.S. citizens continues to be recognized by the USDA. This endeavor was named one of the key research areas in the human nutrition program for the 2016–2021 research cycle [ 2 ], and is proposed to remain as one of five of priority areas for the upcoming five-year cycle [ 3 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dietary Sources of Linoleic Acid (LA) Differ by Race/Ethnicity in Adults Participating in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) between 2017–2018

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Linoleic acid (LA) is a primary n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA), which is of interest to nutritional professionals as it has been associated with health outcomes. However, as some LA-rich foods offer protection against chronic diseases such as CVD (e.g., fatty fish), while others increase risk (e.g., red meat), the individual foods contributing to LA intake may be an important factor to consider. Therefore, this analysis sought to examine whether there are racial/ethnic differences in the proportion of overall LA intake accounted for by individual food groups, via a cross-sectional analysis of 3815 adults participating in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES; 2017–2018 cycle). Separate multivariable linear regressions models specified the proportion of overall LA intake attributable to each of the nine food groups (dairy, eggs, fat, fish, fruits and vegetables, grains, meat, nuts, and sweets) as the outcome, and race/ethnicity as the predictor, with age, gender, and socioeconomic status (SES) as covariates, in order to estimate whether there were mean differences by race/ethnicity in the proportion of overall LA intake attributable to each of these foods seperately. After a Bonferroni correction for multiple testing, eggs, grains, fruits and vegetables, meat, and fish each accounted for a different proportion of overall LA intake according to racial/ethnic grouping (all p < 0.006 after a Bonferroni correction). These findings indicate the food sources of LA in the diet differ by race/ethnicity, and warrant future investigations into whether this plays a role in health disparities.

show abstract

Developmental Process and Early Phases of Implementation for the US Interagency Committee on Human Nutrition Research National Nutrition Research Roadmap 2016–2021

Cited by 8 publications

References 3 publications

Closing Research Investment Gaps for a Global Food Transformation

Closing Research Investment Gaps for a Global Food Transformation

Strengthening national nutrition research: rationale and options for a new coordinated federal research effort and authority

Dietary Sources of Linoleic Acid (LA) Differ by Race/Ethnicity in Adults Participating in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) between 2017–2018

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About