Background: In a world of finite research funding, efforts to prioritize future research topics are increasingly necessary. Objective: The aim of this study was to identify and prioritize the direction of future research in the broad area of low-calorie sweetener (LCS) intake and potentially related health outcomes by using a novel method that incorporates evidence mapping in the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Future Research Needs (FRN) process. Methods: A diverse expert stakeholder panel was convened and engaged to identify research gaps and prioritize future research needs. An independent research team hosted a number of interactive webinars and elicited feedback through surveys and individual interviews with the stakeholder panel, which included policymakers, lay audience members, health providers, a research funder, individuals with food industry experience, and researchers of several different specialties. Results: The stakeholder panel generated and ranked a list of 18 FRN questions across 5 broad research areas. Overall, stakeholder panel members unanimously agreed that the research questions that will have the largest public health impact are those that address outcomes related to body weight, appetite, and dietary intake. Although the LCSs included in this FRN project have all been Generally Recognized as Safe by the FDA or approved as food additives, the recurrent concerns and confusions with regard to the "safety" of LCSs by consumers underscore the importance of communicating the science to the general public. Conclusion: Our project provides evidence that engaging a diverse expert stakeholder panel is an effective method of translating gaps in nutrition research into prioritized areas of future research.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 February 2018.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Current Developments in Nutrition
#1,170
of 1,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,184
of 331,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Developments in Nutrition
#12
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.8. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,454 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
