Redesigning the Process for Establishing the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (2017) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Process Redesign
3 Process Redesign
Pages 55-72
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 55... ...
. Redesign can also address needs for improved continuity between DGA cycles in operational areas such as real-time monitoring and curation of new evidence, and maintaining a focus on strategic objectives that may span multiple DGA cycles.
|
From page 56... ...
Dietary Guidelines Scientific Advisory Committee to inter pret the scientific evidence and draw conclusions. MODEL PROCESS REDESIGN The following process redesign model retains the components and subprocesses used for the 2015–2020 DGA, and reflects elements of the process instituted for the review of evidence targeted to pregnancy and infancy that began in 2012 (USDA, 2017)
|
From page 57... ...
The new DGPCG is envisioned to operate continually across DGA cycles, but would act primarily in the period before a DGSAC is convened and after the DGA Policy Report is updated. The redesign also creates an additional framework to improve support for the scientific needs of the process: technical expert panels (TEPs)
|
From page 58... ...
Selection DGAC (topics, questions, evaluation) Federal staff support USDA/HHS update DGA FIGURE 3-1 Proposed timeline for future DGA cycles.
|
From page 59... ...
research methods, and stakeholders of specific topic being addressed Other types of • Help USDA/HHS data team identify • Methodologic expertise • Data scientists familiar with the analyses and analyze data, prior to convening of relevant methods and data sources DGSAC Dietary • ssess systematic reviews and other types A • Domain expertise • Experts in methods used and Guidelines of evidence to develop conclusions for • Methodologic expertise guideline development Scientific USDA/HHS consideration Advisory • Identify new questions and topics if Committee needed and seek TEP to assist (DGSAC) • Identify topics for DGPCG to consider for the next DGSAC NOTE: CVD = cardiovascular disease; HHS = U.S.
|
From page 60... ...
The functions of supporting strategic planning and overseeing monitoring and surveillance for new evidence require that the DGPCG not be time limited and that it operate across DGA cycles. The DGPCG will need to be composed of nongovernmental experts together with federal staff from USDA and HHS to fulfill its mission.
|
From page 61... ...
Roles and Composition of Technical Expert Panels (TEPs) TEPs, including nonfederal and federal experts with a diversity of expertise and viewpoints, are proposed by this National Academies committee as a flexible mechanism to supplement the technical insights in beginning stages of any type of evidence analysis.
|
From page 62... ...
The DGSAC would deliver a DGSAC scientific report that would serve as the scientific foundation for the DGA Policy Report. The DGSAC would also be charged with identifying topics where more evidence is needed, and 2 Groups of technical experts are used in the AHRQ Evidence-based Practice Centers Program and the non-DGAC NEL systematic review process.
|
From page 63... ...
This knowledge can facilitate creation of effective DGSAC conclusions for the federal DGA writing team's consideration in its development of the DGA Policy Report. Like the DGPCG, DGSAC members would be selected through the process recommended in this National Academies committee's first report (see Boxes 1-4 and 2-3 for further discussion about identifying and managing biases and conflicts of interest)
|
From page 64... ...
This National Academies committee believes nominations need to be fielded from a broad group of interested parties, including the public; professional organizations; food sector organizations; researchers; and state, federal, and local governments. Nomination statements ought to have a standard format for purposes of clarity and organization to facilitate selection of potential topics, such as (1)
|
From page 65... ...
• Addresses health inequities or reduces disparities TOPIC PRIORITIZATION Criteria from topic selection column, plus: • Public health urgency, as appropriate • Consideration of cost-effectiveness for the DGA studies • Availability of evidence-based interventions FIGURE 3-2 Examples of criteria for topic identification, selection, and prioritization. NOTES: These criteria were derived from a number of other efforts at organizations, including the World Health Organization, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidencebased Practice Centers Program, the Institute of Medicine, Cochrane, the U.S.
|
From page 66... ...
the topic addresses a dilemma in public health nutrition; (5) the topic represents an area where there is a degree of urgency for guidance (e.g., significant area of public health concern, emerging area for public health action)
|
From page 67... ...
This National Academies committee strongly believes that the DGSAC, as an independent arbiter of the state of the science, needs to be separated from data collection and evaluation to the greatest extent possible. While it will be necessary to work with the federal teams responsible for conducting systematic reviews, food pattern modeling, and descriptive data analyses, the role of the DGSAC needs to be clear, resulting in a different relationship than recent DGACs have had (see Chapter 4 for more details)
|
From page 68... ...
This National Academies committee considered how the process redesign model could be implemented, while conforming to the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act and the Federal Advisory Com ittee Act; none of the recommended changes in this report would m require a revision to either act. This National Academies committee envisions the DGSAC as a federal advisory committee, like the DGAC has been.
|
From page 69... ...
However, to allow for the DGPCG to operate continually under the constraint of the aforementioned laws, this National Academies committee has identified three options. The first option is to establish the DGPCG as a federal advisory committee whose charter would be renewed every 2 years, the maximum length of time allowed under the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
|
From page 70... ...
One reason for the need for flexibility is that a detailed exploration of the costs of the proposed redesign model could not be weighed in this report owing to a lack of information available regarding current resource use. This National Academies committee believes the operational costs would likely increase in the short term as a result of needing to set up and support the DGPCG, TEPs, and DGSAC.
|
From page 71... ...
. Comments presented at USDA Dietary Guidelines for Americans listening sessions.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.