Cargando…

The Content and Accuracy of the SmartBrief for Nutrition Professionals

OBJECTIVES: SmartBrief (SB) emails, which include reports on nutrition related research and other topics related to the nutrition profession, are sent on weekdays, by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND) to their members. The objective of this study was to describe the content, sources, and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Metallinos-Katsaras, Elizabeth, Losak, Rachel, O'Brien, Jolene
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9193419/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cdn/nzac056.012
_version_ 1784726456647024640
author Metallinos-Katsaras, Elizabeth
Losak, Rachel
O'Brien, Jolene
author_facet Metallinos-Katsaras, Elizabeth
Losak, Rachel
O'Brien, Jolene
author_sort Metallinos-Katsaras, Elizabeth
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: SmartBrief (SB) emails, which include reports on nutrition related research and other topics related to the nutrition profession, are sent on weekdays, by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND) to their members. The objective of this study was to describe the content, sources, and accuracy of the summaries (Briefs) provided in the SBs. METHODS: This was a content analysis of five randomly selected SB email weeks (June 1, 2019-December 1, 2019). Overall, 25 SBs emails containing 267 SB brief summaries (Briefs) were examined. Two researchers abstracted the data with inter-rater reliabilities >.9. To replicate the readers’ access in seeking more information, accuracy was assessed by comparing each Brief with sources provided (news article or both news and journal article). RESULTS: The content of the Briefs (n = 267) fell into two categories: research related and news-related content (59.9% and 40.1% of Briefs, respectively). Overall, 56.6% of Briefs had solely a news source link; only 43.0% had a link to the original source, which was a journal article. Of those with a news source, 25.8% targeted only health professionals; 67.3% targeted solely the public and 6.9% targeted both. Overall, 17.8% of briefs had ≥1 errors but this varied (p < .05) by type of information presented; 21.2% of research related vs.12.7% of news related topics had ≥1 error. Among research-related briefs, a significantly greater percentage of those that included the journal article link and the news link (and were compared to these sources), had ≥1 errors compared to those linking solely to a news article (34.8% vs. 3.8%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Although SB emails are sent out to AND members to provide accurate health-based information, this study found more than half of the articles examined used non-scientific sources, and contained errors. Thus, AND members should be cautious of using solely the SB articles in practice without consulting the original published source. FUNDING SOURCES: None.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9193419
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91934192022-06-14 The Content and Accuracy of the SmartBrief for Nutrition Professionals Metallinos-Katsaras, Elizabeth Losak, Rachel O'Brien, Jolene Curr Dev Nutr Education and Teaching OBJECTIVES: SmartBrief (SB) emails, which include reports on nutrition related research and other topics related to the nutrition profession, are sent on weekdays, by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND) to their members. The objective of this study was to describe the content, sources, and accuracy of the summaries (Briefs) provided in the SBs. METHODS: This was a content analysis of five randomly selected SB email weeks (June 1, 2019-December 1, 2019). Overall, 25 SBs emails containing 267 SB brief summaries (Briefs) were examined. Two researchers abstracted the data with inter-rater reliabilities >.9. To replicate the readers’ access in seeking more information, accuracy was assessed by comparing each Brief with sources provided (news article or both news and journal article). RESULTS: The content of the Briefs (n = 267) fell into two categories: research related and news-related content (59.9% and 40.1% of Briefs, respectively). Overall, 56.6% of Briefs had solely a news source link; only 43.0% had a link to the original source, which was a journal article. Of those with a news source, 25.8% targeted only health professionals; 67.3% targeted solely the public and 6.9% targeted both. Overall, 17.8% of briefs had ≥1 errors but this varied (p < .05) by type of information presented; 21.2% of research related vs.12.7% of news related topics had ≥1 error. Among research-related briefs, a significantly greater percentage of those that included the journal article link and the news link (and were compared to these sources), had ≥1 errors compared to those linking solely to a news article (34.8% vs. 3.8%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Although SB emails are sent out to AND members to provide accurate health-based information, this study found more than half of the articles examined used non-scientific sources, and contained errors. Thus, AND members should be cautious of using solely the SB articles in practice without consulting the original published source. FUNDING SOURCES: None. Oxford University Press 2022-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9193419/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cdn/nzac056.012 Text en © The Author 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The International Society for Human and Animal Mycology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Education and Teaching
Metallinos-Katsaras, Elizabeth
Losak, Rachel
O'Brien, Jolene
The Content and Accuracy of the SmartBrief for Nutrition Professionals
title The Content and Accuracy of the SmartBrief for Nutrition Professionals
title_full The Content and Accuracy of the SmartBrief for Nutrition Professionals
title_fullStr The Content and Accuracy of the SmartBrief for Nutrition Professionals
title_full_unstemmed The Content and Accuracy of the SmartBrief for Nutrition Professionals
title_short The Content and Accuracy of the SmartBrief for Nutrition Professionals
title_sort content and accuracy of the smartbrief for nutrition professionals
topic Education and Teaching
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9193419/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cdn/nzac056.012
work_keys_str_mv AT metallinoskatsaraselizabeth thecontentandaccuracyofthesmartbrieffornutritionprofessionals
AT losakrachel thecontentandaccuracyofthesmartbrieffornutritionprofessionals
AT obrienjolene thecontentandaccuracyofthesmartbrieffornutritionprofessionals
AT metallinoskatsaraselizabeth contentandaccuracyofthesmartbrieffornutritionprofessionals
AT losakrachel contentandaccuracyofthesmartbrieffornutritionprofessionals
AT obrienjolene contentandaccuracyofthesmartbrieffornutritionprofessionals