How experts are chosen to inform public policy: Can the process be improved?
Abstract The ever-increasing complexity of the food supply has magnified the importance of ongoing research into nutrition and food safety issues that have significant impact on public health. At the same time, ethical questions have been raised regarding conflict of interest, making it more challen...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Health policy (Amsterdam) 2013-10, Vol.112 (3), p.172-178 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 178 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 172 |
| container_title | Health policy (Amsterdam) |
| container_volume | 112 |
| creator | Rowe, Sylvia Alexander, Nick Weaver, Connie M Dwyer, Johanna T Drew, Christa Applebaum, Rhona S Atkinson, Stephanie Clydesdale, Fergus M Hentges, Eric Higley, Nancy A Westring, M. Elizabeth |
| description | Abstract The ever-increasing complexity of the food supply has magnified the importance of ongoing research into nutrition and food safety issues that have significant impact on public health. At the same time, ethical questions have been raised regarding conflict of interest, making it more challenging to form the expert panels that advise government agencies and public health officials in formulating nutrition and food safety policy. Primarily due to the growing complexity of the interactions among government, industry, and academic research institutions, increasingly stringent conflict-of-interest policies may have the effect of barring the most experienced and knowledgeable nutrition and food scientists from contributing their expertise on the panels informing public policy. This paper explores the issue in some depth, proposing a set of principles for determining considerations for service on expert advisory committees. Although the issues around scientific policy counsel and the selection of advisory panels clearly have global applicability, the context for their development had a US and Canadian focus in this work. The authors also call for a broader discussion in all sectors of the research community as to whether and how the process of empaneling food science and nutrition experts might be improved. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.01.012 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1550994842</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0168851013000225</els_id><sourcerecordid>1541979534</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c670t-bef39450366400294d0702217f988d9915dbfb522dd12081696c2c94e0586c663</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkl2LEzEYhQdR3Lr6FzQ3gjetb74TL1yWoq5Q8EK9DjOZd2jqfJlMV_vvzdC6glcDgRDy5JyT5BTFKwobClS9PWz2WLbTfhzaDQPKN0DzYI-KFTWarRVI8bhYZdKsjaRwVTxL6QAAmnP1tLhiXFApwayK3d3wi-DvEeOUSBmR-P2QsCfTQELfDLEj47FqgyfZKfjTO7It8-YeyRgHjymRCkno8uIe65vnxZOmbBO-uMzXxfePH75t79a7L58-b293a680TOsKG26FBK6UAGBW1KCBMaoba0xtLZV11VSSsbqmDAxVVnnmrUCQRnml-HXx5qybfX8eMU2uC8lj25Y9Dsfk5rtZK4xgC1BBrbaSiyXonJLBElXGDWgq5AKUKi0sVQsCCGG1zrI2o_qM-jikFLFxYwxdGU-Ogpsb4g7uoSFubogDmscc_eXF5Fh1WD-c-1uJDLy-AGXyZdvEsvch_eN0fi4wM3d75jD_9H3A6JIP2HusQ0Q_uXoIC8K8_0_Dt6EP2fYHnjAdhmPsc5EcdYk5cF_nQs99pjx3mTHJ_wCCCe1X</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1449770719</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How experts are chosen to inform public policy: Can the process be improved?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Rowe, Sylvia ; Alexander, Nick ; Weaver, Connie M ; Dwyer, Johanna T ; Drew, Christa ; Applebaum, Rhona S ; Atkinson, Stephanie ; Clydesdale, Fergus M ; Hentges, Eric ; Higley, Nancy A ; Westring, M. Elizabeth</creator><creatorcontrib>Rowe, Sylvia ; Alexander, Nick ; Weaver, Connie M ; Dwyer, Johanna T ; Drew, Christa ; Applebaum, Rhona S ; Atkinson, Stephanie ; Clydesdale, Fergus M ; Hentges, Eric ; Higley, Nancy A ; Westring, M. Elizabeth ; for the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) North America Conflict of Interest Working Group ; International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) North America Conflict of Interest Working Group</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract The ever-increasing complexity of the food supply has magnified the importance of ongoing research into nutrition and food safety issues that have significant impact on public health. At the same time, ethical questions have been raised regarding conflict of interest, making it more challenging to form the expert panels that advise government agencies and public health officials in formulating nutrition and food safety policy. Primarily due to the growing complexity of the interactions among government, industry, and academic research institutions, increasingly stringent conflict-of-interest policies may have the effect of barring the most experienced and knowledgeable nutrition and food scientists from contributing their expertise on the panels informing public policy. This paper explores the issue in some depth, proposing a set of principles for determining considerations for service on expert advisory committees. Although the issues around scientific policy counsel and the selection of advisory panels clearly have global applicability, the context for their development had a US and Canadian focus in this work. The authors also call for a broader discussion in all sectors of the research community as to whether and how the process of empaneling food science and nutrition experts might be improved.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0168-8510</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-6054</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.01.012</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23415508</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier Ireland Ltd</publisher><subject>Advisory Committees - ethics ; Advisory panels ; Biological and medical sciences ; Canada ; Canadians ; Conflict ; Conflict of Interest ; Experts ; Food ; Food industry ; Food Safety ; Food science experts ; Food supply ; Government agencies ; Government Regulation ; Guidelines as Topic ; Health administration ; Health policy ; Healthy food ; Humans ; Industry ; Interinstitutional Relations ; Internal Medicine ; Medical sciences ; Metabolic diseases ; Miscellaneous ; Nutrition ; Nutrition experts ; Public health ; Public Health - ethics ; Public health. Hygiene ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Public Policy ; Science ; Scientific biases ; Scientists ; United States ; United States Food and Drug Administration</subject><ispartof>Health policy (Amsterdam), 2013-10, Vol.112 (3), p.172-178</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c670t-bef39450366400294d0702217f988d9915dbfb522dd12081696c2c94e0586c663</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c670t-bef39450366400294d0702217f988d9915dbfb522dd12081696c2c94e0586c663</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.01.012$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,3554,27874,27933,27934,31009,46004</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=27979088$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23415508$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rowe, Sylvia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alexander, Nick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weaver, Connie M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dwyer, Johanna T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drew, Christa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Applebaum, Rhona S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atkinson, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clydesdale, Fergus M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hentges, Eric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Higley, Nancy A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Westring, M. Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>for the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) North America Conflict of Interest Working Group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) North America Conflict of Interest Working Group</creatorcontrib><title>How experts are chosen to inform public policy: Can the process be improved?</title><title>Health policy (Amsterdam)</title><addtitle>Health Policy</addtitle><description>Abstract The ever-increasing complexity of the food supply has magnified the importance of ongoing research into nutrition and food safety issues that have significant impact on public health. At the same time, ethical questions have been raised regarding conflict of interest, making it more challenging to form the expert panels that advise government agencies and public health officials in formulating nutrition and food safety policy. Primarily due to the growing complexity of the interactions among government, industry, and academic research institutions, increasingly stringent conflict-of-interest policies may have the effect of barring the most experienced and knowledgeable nutrition and food scientists from contributing their expertise on the panels informing public policy. This paper explores the issue in some depth, proposing a set of principles for determining considerations for service on expert advisory committees. Although the issues around scientific policy counsel and the selection of advisory panels clearly have global applicability, the context for their development had a US and Canadian focus in this work. The authors also call for a broader discussion in all sectors of the research community as to whether and how the process of empaneling food science and nutrition experts might be improved.</description><subject>Advisory Committees - ethics</subject><subject>Advisory panels</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Canada</subject><subject>Canadians</subject><subject>Conflict</subject><subject>Conflict of Interest</subject><subject>Experts</subject><subject>Food</subject><subject>Food industry</subject><subject>Food Safety</subject><subject>Food science experts</subject><subject>Food supply</subject><subject>Government agencies</subject><subject>Government Regulation</subject><subject>Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Health administration</subject><subject>Health policy</subject><subject>Healthy food</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Industry</subject><subject>Interinstitutional Relations</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Metabolic diseases</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Nutrition</subject><subject>Nutrition experts</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Public Health - ethics</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Public Policy</subject><subject>Science</subject><subject>Scientific biases</subject><subject>Scientists</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>United States Food and Drug Administration</subject><issn>0168-8510</issn><issn>1872-6054</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkl2LEzEYhQdR3Lr6FzQ3gjetb74TL1yWoq5Q8EK9DjOZd2jqfJlMV_vvzdC6glcDgRDy5JyT5BTFKwobClS9PWz2WLbTfhzaDQPKN0DzYI-KFTWarRVI8bhYZdKsjaRwVTxL6QAAmnP1tLhiXFApwayK3d3wi-DvEeOUSBmR-P2QsCfTQELfDLEj47FqgyfZKfjTO7It8-YeyRgHjymRCkno8uIe65vnxZOmbBO-uMzXxfePH75t79a7L58-b293a680TOsKG26FBK6UAGBW1KCBMaoba0xtLZV11VSSsbqmDAxVVnnmrUCQRnml-HXx5qybfX8eMU2uC8lj25Y9Dsfk5rtZK4xgC1BBrbaSiyXonJLBElXGDWgq5AKUKi0sVQsCCGG1zrI2o_qM-jikFLFxYwxdGU-Ogpsb4g7uoSFubogDmscc_eXF5Fh1WD-c-1uJDLy-AGXyZdvEsvch_eN0fi4wM3d75jD_9H3A6JIP2HusQ0Q_uXoIC8K8_0_Dt6EP2fYHnjAdhmPsc5EcdYk5cF_nQs99pjx3mTHJ_wCCCe1X</recordid><startdate>20131001</startdate><enddate>20131001</enddate><creator>Rowe, Sylvia</creator><creator>Alexander, Nick</creator><creator>Weaver, Connie M</creator><creator>Dwyer, Johanna T</creator><creator>Drew, Christa</creator><creator>Applebaum, Rhona S</creator><creator>Atkinson, Stephanie</creator><creator>Clydesdale, Fergus M</creator><creator>Hentges, Eric</creator><creator>Higley, Nancy A</creator><creator>Westring, M. Elizabeth</creator><general>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20131001</creationdate><title>How experts are chosen to inform public policy: Can the process be improved?</title><author>Rowe, Sylvia ; Alexander, Nick ; Weaver, Connie M ; Dwyer, Johanna T ; Drew, Christa ; Applebaum, Rhona S ; Atkinson, Stephanie ; Clydesdale, Fergus M ; Hentges, Eric ; Higley, Nancy A ; Westring, M. Elizabeth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c670t-bef39450366400294d0702217f988d9915dbfb522dd12081696c2c94e0586c663</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Advisory Committees - ethics</topic><topic>Advisory panels</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Canada</topic><topic>Canadians</topic><topic>Conflict</topic><topic>Conflict of Interest</topic><topic>Experts</topic><topic>Food</topic><topic>Food industry</topic><topic>Food Safety</topic><topic>Food science experts</topic><topic>Food supply</topic><topic>Government agencies</topic><topic>Government Regulation</topic><topic>Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Health administration</topic><topic>Health policy</topic><topic>Healthy food</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Industry</topic><topic>Interinstitutional Relations</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Metabolic diseases</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Nutrition</topic><topic>Nutrition experts</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Public Health - ethics</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Public Policy</topic><topic>Science</topic><topic>Scientific biases</topic><topic>Scientists</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>United States Food and Drug Administration</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rowe, Sylvia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alexander, Nick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weaver, Connie M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dwyer, Johanna T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drew, Christa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Applebaum, Rhona S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atkinson, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clydesdale, Fergus M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hentges, Eric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Higley, Nancy A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Westring, M. Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>for the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) North America Conflict of Interest Working Group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) North America Conflict of Interest Working Group</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Health policy (Amsterdam)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rowe, Sylvia</au><au>Alexander, Nick</au><au>Weaver, Connie M</au><au>Dwyer, Johanna T</au><au>Drew, Christa</au><au>Applebaum, Rhona S</au><au>Atkinson, Stephanie</au><au>Clydesdale, Fergus M</au><au>Hentges, Eric</au><au>Higley, Nancy A</au><au>Westring, M. Elizabeth</au><aucorp>for the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) North America Conflict of Interest Working Group</aucorp><aucorp>International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) North America Conflict of Interest Working Group</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How experts are chosen to inform public policy: Can the process be improved?</atitle><jtitle>Health policy (Amsterdam)</jtitle><addtitle>Health Policy</addtitle><date>2013-10-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>112</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>172</spage><epage>178</epage><pages>172-178</pages><issn>0168-8510</issn><eissn>1872-6054</eissn><abstract>Abstract The ever-increasing complexity of the food supply has magnified the importance of ongoing research into nutrition and food safety issues that have significant impact on public health. At the same time, ethical questions have been raised regarding conflict of interest, making it more challenging to form the expert panels that advise government agencies and public health officials in formulating nutrition and food safety policy. Primarily due to the growing complexity of the interactions among government, industry, and academic research institutions, increasingly stringent conflict-of-interest policies may have the effect of barring the most experienced and knowledgeable nutrition and food scientists from contributing their expertise on the panels informing public policy. This paper explores the issue in some depth, proposing a set of principles for determining considerations for service on expert advisory committees. Although the issues around scientific policy counsel and the selection of advisory panels clearly have global applicability, the context for their development had a US and Canadian focus in this work. The authors also call for a broader discussion in all sectors of the research community as to whether and how the process of empaneling food science and nutrition experts might be improved.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</pub><pmid>23415508</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.01.012</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0168-8510 |
| ispartof | Health policy (Amsterdam), 2013-10, Vol.112 (3), p.172-178 |
| issn | 0168-8510 1872-6054 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1550994842 |
| source | MEDLINE; PAIS Index; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
| subjects | Advisory Committees - ethics Advisory panels Biological and medical sciences Canada Canadians Conflict Conflict of Interest Experts Food Food industry Food Safety Food science experts Food supply Government agencies Government Regulation Guidelines as Topic Health administration Health policy Healthy food Humans Industry Interinstitutional Relations Internal Medicine Medical sciences Metabolic diseases Miscellaneous Nutrition Nutrition experts Public health Public Health - ethics Public health. Hygiene Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine Public Policy Science Scientific biases Scientists United States United States Food and Drug Administration |
| title | How experts are chosen to inform public policy: Can the process be improved? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-03T09%3A37%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20experts%20are%20chosen%20to%20inform%20public%20policy:%20Can%20the%20process%20be%20improved?&rft.jtitle=Health%20policy%20(Amsterdam)&rft.au=Rowe,%20Sylvia&rft.aucorp=for%20the%20International%20Life%20Sciences%20Institute%20(ILSI)%20North%20America%20Conflict%20of%20Interest%20Working%20Group&rft.date=2013-10-01&rft.volume=112&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=172&rft.epage=178&rft.pages=172-178&rft.issn=0168-8510&rft.eissn=1872-6054&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.01.012&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1541979534%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1449770719&rft_id=info:pmid/23415508&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0168851013000225&rfr_iscdi=true |