Changing landscape of nutrition and dietetics research? A bibliographic analysis of top-tier published research in 1998 and 2018. Issue 6 (13th April 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Yoong, Sze Lin; Jackson, Jacklyn; Barnes, Courtney; Pearson, Nicole; Swindle, Taren; O'Reilly, Sharleen; Tabak, Rachel; Belski, Regina; Brown, Alison; Sutherland, Rachel
• Is Part Of: Public health nutrition. Volume 24:Issue 6(2021)
• Page Start: 1318
• Page End: 1327
• Publication Date: 2021-04-13
• Subjects: Bibliometric, -- Research translation, -- Study design, -- Research focus, -- Implementation science; Nutrition -- Periodicals; Nutrition policy -- Periodicals; Public health -- Periodicals; 613.2
• DOI: 10.1017/S1368980021000136
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1368-9800

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: The current study sought to describe and compare study type, research design and translation phase of published research in nutrition and dietetic journals in 1998 and 2018. Design: This was a repeat cross-sectional bibliographic analysis of Nutrition and Dietetics research. All eligible studies in the top eight Nutrition and Dietetics indexed journals in 1998 and 2018 were included. Two independent reviewers coded each study for research design (study type and study design) and translation phase (T0-T4) of the research using seminal texts in the field. Setting: Not relevant. Participants: Not relevant. Results: The number of publications (1998, n 1030; 2018, n 1016) has not changed over time, but the research type, design and translation phases have. The proportion of intervention studies in 1998 (43·8 %) was significantly higher than 2018 (19·4 %). In 2018, more reviews (46·9 % v . 15·6 % in 1998) and less randomised trials (14·3 % v . 37·8 % in 1998) were published. In regard to translation phase, there was a higher proportion of T2–T4 research in 2018 (18·3 % v . 3·8 % in 1998); however, the proportion of T3/T4 (dissemination, implementation and population-level research) research was still low (<3 %). Our sensitivity analysis with the four journals that remained in the top eight journal across the two time periods found no differences in the research type, design and translation phases across time. Conclusions: There was a reduction in intervention and T0 publications, alongside higher publication of clinical study designs over time; however, published T3/T4 research in Nutrition and Dietetics is low. A greater focus on publishing interventions and dissemination and implementation may be needed.