A Unifying Vision for Scientific Decision Making: The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics’ Scientific Integrity Principles

Interactions Between Nutrition Professionals and Industry: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

In recent years, interactions between nutrition professionals (NPs) and the food industry, such as sponsorship arrangements, have raised concerns, particularly as these may negatively impact the trustworthiness and credibility of the nutrition profession. This study aimed to map the literature and identify knowledge gaps regarding interactions between NPs and industry. We sought to examine the nature of such interactions and NPs perspectives about these, as well as the risks and solutions.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review according to a pre-registered protocol, searching eight electronic databases and grey literature sources in March 2021 to identify documents for inclusion. Two independent reviewers screened citations for inclusion and conducted data extraction. Quantitative and qualitative syntheses were conducted.

RESULTS

We identified 115 documents for analysis, published between 1980 to 2021, with a majority from the United States (n=59, 51%). Only 32% (n=37) were empirical studies. The food industry was the most frequent industry type discussed (n=91, 79%). We identified 32 types of interactions between NPs and industry, such as continuing education provided by industry and sponsorship of professional bodies and health and nutrition organizations. The financial survival of nutrition organizations and continuing education access for NPs were the most frequently cited advantages of industry-NPs interactions. On the other hand, undermining public trust, NPs credibility and public health nutrition recommendations were pointed out as risks of these interactions. Following a code of ethics, policies, or guidelines was the most frequently proposed solution for managing these interactions.

CONCLUSION

Despite the increasing attention given to this issue, few empirical papers have been published to date. There is a need for more research to better and systematically document industry interactions with NPs and the impacts associated with these, as well as more research on effective management strategies. Registry Name and Number: Interactions between nutrition professionals and industry actors: A scoping review protocol. doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/Q6PUA.

Lacking Clarity or Strategic Ambiguity? Comment on "Competing Frames in Global Health Governance: An Analysis of Stakeholder Influence on the Political Declaration on Non-communicable Diseases"

This commentary engages with Suzuki and colleagues' analysis about the ambiguity of multi-stakeholder discourses in the United Nations (UN) Political Declaration of the 3rd High-Level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases (HLM-NCDs), suggesting that blurring between public and private sector in this declaration reflects broader debates about multi-stakeholder partnerships (MSPs) and public-private partnerships (PPPs) in health governance. We argue that the ambiguity between the roles and responsibilities of public and private actors involved may downplay the role (and regulation) of conflicts of interest (COI) between unhealthy commodity industries and public health. We argue that this ambiguity is not simply an artefact of the Political Declaration process, but a feature of multi-stakeholderism, which assumes that commercial actors´ interests can be aligned with the public interest. To safeguard global health governance, we recommend further empirical and conceptual research on COI and how it can be managed.

An Updated Framework for Industry Funding of Food and Nutrition Research: Managing Financial Conflicts and Scientific Integrity

Although the food and beverage industry plays a critical role in advancing food and nutrition science, industry-funded research is subject to intense scrutiny as a result of various perceived and real biases related to funding sources. To address this, the Institute for the Advancement of Food and Nutrition Sciences (IAFNS) Assembly on Scientific Integrity has updated its Guiding Principles for Funding Food Science and Nutrition Research to provide a modernized framework for minimizing bias and promoting integrity in industry-funded research. Existing best practices for managing conflicts and maintaining trust in science, as well as coverage related to conflicts in industry-funded research, were reviewed to inform the development of the updated Guiding Principles. The updated Guiding Principles continue to provide conflict-of-interest guidelines to protect the integrity and credibility of the scientific record. These updates provide clarification, strengthen the guardrails that separate the funding from the science, and reflect the shift within the scientific community toward increased transparency and open science. If the principles are followed as intended, there should be little reason to dispute the results of industry-funded studies, other than to debate the science itself. This article issues a challenge to the research community to strive for just that.

What principles should guide interactions between population health researchers and the food industry? Systematic scoping review of peer-reviewed and grey literature

There is no explicit consensus amongst population health researchers regarding what constitutes acceptable or effective interactions with the food industry. This has led to confusion and disagreements over conflicts of interest, which can undermine the integrity of science. To clarify this issue, we aimed to systematically identify the key principles developed by population health researchers to prevent or minimize conflicts of interest when interacting with the food industry. Databases of peer-reviewed literature were searched. In addition, an advanced Google search, a request to experts seeking related documents, and hand searching of references were undertaken. Thematic analysis of the extracted data was undertaken. We examined 54 eligible documents describing guidelines for population health researchers when interacting with the food industry. Fifty-six principles were identified and synthesized in five themes. There were high levels of agreement in themes relating to research governance, transparency, and publication but less agreement and guidance on how principles should be applied in relation to funding and risk assessment. There is agreement on some of the general principles for preventing and minimizing conflicts of interests for population health researchers when interacting with the food industry. However, for issues such as assessing the appropriateness of an industry partner, greater clarity and consensus are required.