• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Best practices in nutrition science to earn and keep the public's trust.营养科学领域赢得和保持公众信任的最佳实践。
Am J Clin Nutr. 2019 Jan 1;109(1):225-243. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/nqy337.
2
Transforming the culture of biomedical research from compliance to trustworthiness: insights from nonmedical sectors.将生物医学研究文化从合规转变为值得信赖:来自非医学领域的见解。
Acad Med. 2009 Apr;84(4):472-7. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31819a8aa6.
3
Best Practices for Conducting Observational Research to Assess the Relation between Nutrition and Bone: An International Working Group Summary.评估营养与骨骼关系的观察性研究开展最佳实践:国际工作组总结。
Adv Nutr. 2019 May 1;10(3):391-409. doi: 10.1093/advances/nmy111.
4
Challenges and opportunities for better nutrition science-an essay by Tim Spector and Christopher Gardner.改善营养科学面临的挑战与机遇——蒂姆·斯佩克特和克里斯托弗·加德纳的文章
BMJ. 2020 Jun 26;369:m2470. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m2470.
5
Enhancing public trust in the food safety regulatory system.增强公众对食品安全监管体系的信任。
Health Policy. 2012 Sep;107(1):98-103. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.05.010. Epub 2012 Jun 22.
6
Scientific rigor and credibility in the nutrition research landscape.营养研究领域的科学严谨性和可信度。
Am J Clin Nutr. 2018 Mar 1;107(3):484-494. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/nqx067.
7
Session 5: Nutrition communication. The role of trust in health communication and the effect of conflicts of interest among scientists.第5场:营养沟通。信任在健康沟通中的作用以及科学家利益冲突的影响。
Proc Nutr Soc. 2008 Nov;67(4):428-36. doi: 10.1017/S0029665108008689.
8
Learning from the Flint Water Crisis: Restoring and Improving Public Health Practice, Accountability, and Trust.从弗林特水危机中学习:恢复和改进公共卫生实践、问责制和信任。
J Law Med Ethics. 2019 Jun;47(2_suppl):23-26. doi: 10.1177/1073110519857310.
9
Goal of maintaining public's trust brings research groups together on conflict-of-interest guidelines.维护公众信任的目标促使研究团体就利益冲突准则达成共识。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005 Nov 2;97(21):1560-1. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dji391.
10
Examining public trust in risk-managing organizations after a major disaster.重大灾难后公众对风险管理组织的信任度调查。
Risk Anal. 2015 Jan;35(1):57-67. doi: 10.1111/risa.12243. Epub 2014 Jun 20.

引用本文的文献

1
The impact of investigator bias in nutrition research.研究者偏倚在营养研究中的影响。
Front Nutr. 2025 Apr 17;12:1513343. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2025.1513343. eCollection 2025.
2
Multi-faceted nutritional science demonstrated through the prism of sugar: a scoping review on sugar intake and association with quality of life in children and adolescents.从糖的视角展现的多维度营养科学:关于儿童和青少年糖摄入量及其与生活质量关系的范围综述
Eur J Nutr. 2025 Mar 24;64(3):137. doi: 10.1007/s00394-025-03648-3.
3
Noninvasive Optical Sensing of Aging and Diet Preferences Using Raman Spectroscopy.利用拉曼光谱对衰老和饮食偏好进行无创光学传感
Anal Chem. 2025 Jan 14;97(1):969-975. doi: 10.1021/acs.analchem.4c05853. Epub 2025 Jan 1.
4
Artificial intelligence in food and nutrition evidence: The challenges and opportunities.食品与营养领域人工智能的证据:挑战与机遇
PNAS Nexus. 2024 Oct 15;3(12):pgae461. doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae461. eCollection 2024 Dec.
5
An unbiased, sustainable, evidence-informed Universal Food Guide: a timely template for national food guides.一个公正、可持续、基于证据的通用食品指南:国家食品指南的及时模板。
Nutr J. 2024 Oct 18;23(1):126. doi: 10.1186/s12937-024-01018-z.
6
Nutritional care for cancer patients: are we doing enough?癌症患者的营养护理:我们做得够吗?
Front Nutr. 2024 Apr 24;11:1361800. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1361800. eCollection 2024.
7
Interactions Between Nutrition Professionals and Industry: A Scoping Review.营养专业人员与行业之间的互动:一项范围综述
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2023;12:7626. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2023.7626. Epub 2023 Aug 22.
8
Prevalence and Correlates of Dietary and Nutrition Information Seeking Through Various Web-Based and Offline Media Sources Among Japanese Adults: Web-Based Cross-Sectional Study.日本成年人通过各种网络和线下媒体资源寻求饮食和营养信息的流行情况及相关因素:基于网络的横断面研究。
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2024 Feb 14;10:e54805. doi: 10.2196/54805.
9
Management of evidence and conflict of interest in guidelines on early childhood allergy prevention and child nutrition: study protocol of a systematic synthesis of guidelines and explorative network analysis.管理证据和利益冲突在儿童过敏预防和儿童营养指南:系统综述指南和探索性网络分析的研究方案。
F1000Res. 2023 Dec 27;11:1290. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.123571.2. eCollection 2022.
10
Perspective: A Research Roadmap about Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health for the United States Food System: Proceedings from an Interdisciplinary, Multi-Stakeholder Workshop.观点:美国食品体系中关于超加工食品与人类健康的研究路线图:来自跨学科、多利益相关者研讨会的报告。
Adv Nutr. 2023 Nov;14(6):1255-1269. doi: 10.1016/j.advnut.2023.09.005. Epub 2023 Sep 16.

本文引用的文献

1
Guidance on the assessment of the biological relevance of data in scientific assessments.科学评估中数据生物学相关性评估指南。
EFSA J. 2017 Aug 3;15(8):e04970. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4970. eCollection 2017 Aug.
2
So you want to change the world?那么你想改变世界吗?
Nature. 2016 Dec 21;540(7634):517-519. doi: 10.1038/540517a.
3
Was there ever really a "sugar conspiracy"?真的存在过“糖阴谋”吗?
Science. 2018 Feb 16;359(6377):747-750. doi: 10.1126/science.aaq1618.
4
Disclosures in Nutrition Research: Why It Is Different.营养研究中的披露:为何与众不同。
JAMA. 2018 Feb 13;319(6):547-548. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.18571.
5
Dietary Fats and Cardiovascular Disease: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association.膳食脂肪与心血管疾病:美国心脏协会的总统顾问报告。
Circulation. 2017 Jul 18;136(3):e1-e23. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000510. Epub 2017 Jun 15.
6
The March of Science - The True Story.科学的征程——真实的故事
N Engl J Med. 2017 Jul 13;377(2):188-191. doi: 10.1056/NEJMms1706087. Epub 2017 May 17.
7
Beware of the predatory science journal: A potential threat to the integrity of medical research.警惕掠夺性科学期刊:对医学研究诚信的潜在威胁。
Clin Anat. 2017 Sep;30(6):767-773. doi: 10.1002/ca.22899. Epub 2017 Jul 6.
8
Conflict of Interest and the Role of the Food Industry in Nutrition Research.利益冲突与食品行业在营养研究中的作用
JAMA. 2017 May 2;317(17):1755-1756. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.3456.
9
Researchers should reach beyond the science bubble.研究人员应该超越科学的圈子。
Nature. 2017 Feb 21;542(7642):391. doi: 10.1038/542391a.
10
European Universities' Guidance on Research Integrity and Misconduct.欧洲大学关于研究诚信与不当行为的指南。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2017 Feb;12(1):33-44. doi: 10.1177/1556264616688980.

营养科学领域赢得和保持公众信任的最佳实践。

Best practices in nutrition science to earn and keep the public's trust.

机构信息

Division of Nutritional Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.

出版信息

Am J Clin Nutr. 2019 Jan 1;109(1):225-243. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/nqy337.

DOI:10.1093/ajcn/nqy337
PMID:30657846
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6900562/
Abstract

Public trust in nutrition science is the foundation on which nutrition and health progress is based, including sound public health. An ASN-commissioned, independent Advisory Committee comprehensively reviewed the literature and available public surveys about the public's trust in nutrition science and the factors that influence it and conducted stakeholder outreach regarding publicly available information. The Committee selected 7 overlapping domains projected to significantly influence public trust: 1) conflict of interest and objectivity; 2) public benefit; 3) standards of scientific rigor and reproducibility; 4) transparency; 5) equity; 6) information dissemination (education, communication, and marketing); and 7) accountability. The literature review comprehensively explored current practices and threats to public trust in nutrition science, including gaps that erode trust. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of peer-reviewed material specifically focused on nutrition science. Available material was examined, and its analysis informed the development of priority best practices. The Committee proposed best practices to support public trust, appropriate to ASN and other food and nutrition organizations motivated by the conviction that public trust remains key to the realization of the benefits of past, present, and future scientific advances. The adoption of the best practices by food and nutrition organizations, such as ASN, other stakeholder organizations, researchers, food and nutrition professionals, companies, government officials, and individuals working in the food and nutrition space would strengthen and help ensure earning and keeping the public's continued trust in nutrition science.

摘要

公众对营养科学的信任是营养和健康进步的基础,包括健全的公共卫生。美国营养学会委托一个独立的顾问委员会全面审查了关于公众对营养科学的信任及其影响因素的文献和现有公众调查,并就公开信息开展了利益相关者外联活动。委员会选择了 7 个重叠的领域,这些领域预计会对公众信任产生重大影响:1)利益冲突和客观性;2)公共利益;3)科学严谨性和可重复性标准;4)透明度;5)公平性;6)信息传播(教育、沟通和营销);7)问责制。文献综述全面探讨了当前影响营养科学公众信任的实践和威胁,包括侵蚀信任的差距。不幸的是,专门针对营养科学的同行评审材料很少。审查了可用的材料,其分析为制定优先最佳实践提供了信息。委员会提出了支持公众信任的最佳实践,这些最佳实践适合美国营养学会和其他食品和营养组织,其动机是坚信公众信任仍然是实现过去、现在和未来科学进步的利益的关键。食品和营养组织(如美国营养学会)、其他利益相关者组织、研究人员、食品和营养专业人员、公司、政府官员以及在食品和营养领域工作的个人,如果采用这些最佳实践,将加强并有助于确保营养科学继续赢得和保持公众的信任。