Built environment assessment: Multidisciplinary perspectives.

Context:As obesity has become increasingly widespread, scientists seek better ways to assess and modify built and social environments to positively impact health. The applicable methods and concepts draw on multiple disciplines and require collaboration and cross-learning. This paper describes the results of an expert team׳s analysis of how key disciplinary perspectives contribute to environmental context-based assessment related to obesity, identifies gaps, and suggests opportunities to encourage effective advances in this arena. Evidence acquisition:A team of experts representing diverse disciplines convened in 2013 to discuss the contributions of their respective disciplines to assessing built environments relevant to obesity prevention. The disciplines include urban planning, public health nutrition, exercise science, physical activity research, public health and epidemiology, behavioral and social sciences, and economics. Each expert identified key concepts and measures from their discipline, and applications to built environment assessment and action. A selective review of published literature and internet-based information was conducted in 2013 and 2014. Evidence synthesis:The key points that are highlighted in this article were identified in 2014-2015 through discussion, debate and consensus-building among the team of experts. Results focus on the various disciplines׳ perspectives and tools, recommendations, progress and gaps. Conclusions:There has been significant progress in collaboration across key disciplines that contribute to studies of built environments and obesity, but important gaps remain. Using lessons from interprofessional education and team science, along with appreciation of and attention to other disciplines׳ contributions, can promote more effective cross-disciplinary collaboration in obesity prevention

Towards the integration and development of a cross-European research network and infrastructure:the DEterminants of DIet and Physical ACtivity (DEDIPAC) Knowledge Hub

To address major societal challenges and enhance cooperation in research across Europe, the European Commission has initiated and facilitated ‘joint programming’. Joint programming is a process by which Member States engage in defining, developing and implementing a common strategic research agenda, based on a shared vision of how to address major societal challenges that no Member State is capable of resolving independently. Setting up a Joint Programming Initiative (JPI) should also contribute to avoiding unnecessary overlap and repetition of research, and enable and enhance the development and use of standardised research methods, procedures and data management. The Determinants of Diet and Physical Activity (DEDIPAC) Knowledge Hub (KH) is the first act of the European JPI ‘A Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life’. The objective of DEDIPAC is to contribute to improving understanding of the determinants of dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours. DEDIPAC KH is a multi-disciplinary consortium of 46 consortia and organisations supported by joint programming grants from 12 countries across Europe. The work is divided into three thematic areas: (I) assessment and harmonisation of methods for future research, surveillance and monitoring, and for evaluation of interventions and policies; (II) determinants of dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours across the life course and in vulnerable groups; and (III) evaluation and benchmarking of public health and policy interventions aimed at improving dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours. In the first three years, DEDIPAC KH will organise, develop, share and harmonise expertise, methods, measures, data and other infrastructure. This should further European research and improve the broad multi-disciplinary approach needed to study the interactions between multilevel determinants in influencing dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours. Insights will be translated into more effective interventions and policies for the promotion of healthier behaviours and more effective monitoring and evaluation of the impacts of such intervention

Local Government Actions to Prevent Childhood Obesity

Offers guidance on policy and programmatic actions local governments can take, with community input, to promote healthy eating and physical activity and to ensure equal opportunities for healthy living in low-income neighborhoods. Profiles best practices

Health Benefits of Urban Agriculture

Health professionals increasingly recognize the value of farm-and garden-scale urban agriculture. Growing food and non-food crops in and near cities contributes to healthy communities by engaging residents in work and recreation that improves individual and public well-being. This article outlines the benefits of urban agriculture with regard to nutrition, food security, exercise, mental health, and social and physical urban environments. Potential risks are reviewed. Practical recommendations for health professionals to increase the positive benefits of urban agriculture are provided

North-South knowledgesharing on incentive-based conditional cash transfer programs

Over the last decade, Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) programs have become one of the most widely adopted anti-poverty initiatives in the developing world. Inspired particularly by Mexico's successful program, CCTs are viewed as an effective way to provide basic income support while building children's human capital. These programs have had a remarkable global expansion, from a handful programs in the late 1990s to programs in close to 30 countries today, including a demonstration program in the United States. In contrast to many other safety net programs in developing countries, CCTs have been closely studied and well evaluated, creating both a strong evidence base from which to inform policy decisions and an active global community of practice. This paper first reviews the emergence of CCTs in the context of a key theme in welfare reform, notably using incentives to promote human capital development, going beyond the traditional focus on income support. The paper then examines what has been learned to date from the experience with CCTs in the South and raises a series of questions concerning the relevance and replicability of these lessons in other contexts. The paper concludes with a call for further knowledge sharing in two areas: between the North and South as the experience with welfare reform and CCTs in particular expands, and between behavioral science and welfare policy.Safety Nets and Transfers,Rural Poverty Reduction,Population Policies,Health Monitoring&Evaluation,Labor Policies

National Scientific Facilities and Their Science Impact on Non-Biomedical Research

H-index, proposed by Hirsch is a good indicator of the impact of a scientist's research. When evaluating departments, institutions or labs, the importance of h-index can be further enhanced when properly calibrated for size. Particularly acute is the issue of federally funded facilities whose number of actively publishing scientists frequently dwarfs that of academic departments. Recently Molinari and Molinari developed a methodology that shows the h-index has a universal growth rate for large numbers of papers, allowing for meaningful comparisons between institutions. An additional challenge when comparing large institutions is that fields have distinct internal cultures, with different typical rates of publication and citation; biology is more highly cited than physics, which is more highly cited than engineering. For this reason, this study has focused on the physical sciences, engineering, and technology, and has excluded bio-medical research. Comparisons between individual disciplines are reported here to provide contextual framework. Generally, it was found that the universal growth rate of Molinari and Molinari holds well across all the categories considered, testifying to the robustness of both their growth law and our results. The overall goal here is to set the highest standard of comparison for federal investment in science; comparisons are made with the nations preeminent private and public institutions. We find that many among the national facilities compare favorably in research impact with the nations leading universities.Comment: 22 pages, 7 figure

Division of Nutritional Sciences

Cornell University Courses of Study Vol. 95 2003/200

Division of Nutritional Sciences

Cornell University Courses of Study Vol. 94 2002/200