PMC:7454258 / 199857-207806 JSONTXT

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-FMA-UBERON","denotations":[{"id":"T1","span":{"begin":1162,"end":1168},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T2","span":{"begin":1353,"end":1362},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T3","span":{"begin":1358,"end":1362},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T4","span":{"begin":4020,"end":4025},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T5","span":{"begin":4083,"end":4088},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T6","span":{"begin":4531,"end":4536},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T7","span":{"begin":4757,"end":4762},"obj":"Body_part"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A1","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T1","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma84116"},{"id":"A2","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T2","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma63368"},{"id":"A3","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T3","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma68646"},{"id":"A4","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T4","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma50801"},{"id":"A5","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T5","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma50801"},{"id":"A6","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T6","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma50801"},{"id":"A7","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T7","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma50801"}],"text":"New trans-NIH initiative(s) in nutrition research\nTrans-NIH initiatives are efforts to promote collaborative research across NIH in a particular area of science. These initiatives can originate from the NIH Director; NIH institutes, centers, or offices; or Congress. Some of these initiatives engage with external stakeholders such as businesses and nonprofit foundations. The funding, leadership, and structures for trans-NIH initiatives tend to vary. Generally, trans-NIH programs utilize the same mechanisms of grant funding that NIH currently offers: research grants (R series), career development awards (K series), research training and fellowships (T \u0026 F series), program project/center grants (P series), and resource grants (various series) (333). NIH currently supports a variety of broad-reaching programs that are trans-NIH in nature; examples include Biomedical Information Science and Technology Institute (BISTI), NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research, Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research, Administrative Supplements to Existing NIH Grants and Cooperative Agreements, New and Early Stage Investigators Policies, Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Common Fund, NIH Basic Behavioral and Social Science Research Opportunity Network (OppNet), Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers, Stem Cell Information (PECASE), and the Trans-NIH Countermeasures Against Chemical Threats (CounterACT) program (333).\nThe NIH Common Fund has emerged as one approach to support trans-NIH programs and uses the same mechanisms of support. The NIH Common Fund is a specific component of the NIH budget and is managed by the Office of Strategic Coordination/Division of Program Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Coordination/Office of the NIH Director (329). Common Fund programs are short-term (usually ∼5 y), goal-driven strategic investments that are “intended to change paradigms, develop innovative tools and technologies, and/or provide fundamental foundations for research that can be used by the broad biomedical research community” (329). Then, an NIH institute, center, or office or multiple institutes, centers, and offices must continue the support of these time-limited programs.\nAs one example, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was a trans-NIH initiative supported by the NIH Common Fund from 2007 to 2016 (334). This project aimed to expand science on the microbiome. Initially funded as an initiative of the NIH Roadmap for Biomedical Research, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was originally established as a 5-y project with a budget of $150 million (335). The project began with a “jumpstart” phase in 2007 and a set of grants was funded in mid-2009 and additional demonstration project grants were awarded. These activities were supported by a Data Analysis and Coordination Center and a set of additional grants was awarded for developing new technologies, new software tools, and studying the ethical, legal, and social implications of this work. The grantees worked together in a highly cooperative consortium. Ultimately, this 10-y $215 million project spanned \u003e20 of the NIH institutes, centers, and offices and resulted in a \u003e40-fold increase in nonproject investment in microbiome research (336). That is, individual or multiple institutes, centers, and offices used program announcements or request for applications. Some of these funding mechanisms were supported by the Common Fund and others were additional commitments by the participating NIH institutes, centers, and offices from their own budgets. The Trans-NIH Microbiome Working Group established in 2012 provided a forum for coordinating NIH extramural research activities related to the human microbiome and continues to coordinate this work after the NIH Human Microbiome Project was completed. Notably, the NIH Human Microbiome Project identified several potential priority areas around food and the microbiome, but these topics have not yet been systematically pursued.\nThe Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) initiative is an example of a trans-NIH initiative (337), supported by staff within NIH and across federal working groups and providing funding for intramural and extramural research, training, and technology development. Between 2013 and 2019, this initiative supported \u003e700 research projects totaling ∼$1.3 billion through support across the NIH, including appropriations through the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114–255) (337). The BRAIN initiative is managed by 10 NIH institutes and centers, with coordination at multiple levels. Extramural program staff and institute and center directors meet regularly to integrate strategic planning, management, and a BRAIN Multi-Council Working Group and Neuroethics Working Group provide further input on a variety of issues.\nAnother trans-NIH example is the All of US Research Program (Public Law 115–31), directly supported through annual appropriations from Congress ($1.5 billion over 10 y) (Public Law 115–31). This initiative, supported and overseen by NIH, arose from recommendations by the NIH's Precision Medicine Initiative Working Group of the Advisory Committee to the Director (338). The program staff are based in the NIH Office of the Director, with a Trans-NIH Liaisons Coordinating Team made up of scientific leaders from across NIH and has an external advisory panel.\nA potential trans-NIH program in Precision Nutrition is being considered as an NIH Common Fund program for fiscal year 2021 (131, 339), and the NIH Director included Precision Nutrition in the NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). A new Program Director in the NIDDK ONR was hired in 2020 to lead this initiative.\n\nAdvantages\nLegislation is not required. A trans-NIH initiative can help galvanize NIH to develop a coordinated approach to a specific topic on nutrition and human health (e.g., see Table 2). Such an effort would generally be preceded by a careful—and separately useful—review of relevant NIH leadership, staffing, funding, external advisory mechanisms, and collaborative approaches available. A trans-NIH initiative brings new strategic planning, working groups, funding opportunities, training, and technology development. A trans-NIH initiative is complementary to other NIH and cross-governmental strategies to strengthen federal nutrition research. Such initiatives can also help build new or enhanced public–private partnerships.\n\nDisadvantages\nThe needs and opportunities across nutrition research are broad and complex, and a new trans-NIH initiative would cover 1 focused topic, such as, if funded, precision nutrition. Addressing the science gaps and opportunities for nutrition—a leading cause of disease in the US—will require greater and more sustained authority, coordination, resources, and collaboration than provided by a single initiative, especially one only limited to precision nutrition. Trans-NIH initiatives are generally time-limited, difficult to sustain, and not easily communicated to a broad range of external stakeholders. The long-term success of such initiatives can be dependent on a single leading NIH institute, center, and/or office to commit to carry that area of work forward after the initial investments.\n\nPath forward\nThe NIH Director could propose new trans-NIH budget initiatives for Congress to review; as noted earlier, Precision Nutrition is proposed in NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). Congress could authorize and appropriate funds for this proposed initiative or put forth support for another or additional trans-NIH initiative(s) focused on ≥1 areas of nutrition research. NIH institutes, centers, and offices can develop and collectively support trans-NIH initiatives. External support through the private and nongovernment sectors can also be mobilized through public–private partnerships."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-UBERON","denotations":[{"id":"T54","span":{"begin":4020,"end":4025},"obj":"Body_part"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A54","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T54","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000955"}],"text":"New trans-NIH initiative(s) in nutrition research\nTrans-NIH initiatives are efforts to promote collaborative research across NIH in a particular area of science. These initiatives can originate from the NIH Director; NIH institutes, centers, or offices; or Congress. Some of these initiatives engage with external stakeholders such as businesses and nonprofit foundations. The funding, leadership, and structures for trans-NIH initiatives tend to vary. Generally, trans-NIH programs utilize the same mechanisms of grant funding that NIH currently offers: research grants (R series), career development awards (K series), research training and fellowships (T \u0026 F series), program project/center grants (P series), and resource grants (various series) (333). NIH currently supports a variety of broad-reaching programs that are trans-NIH in nature; examples include Biomedical Information Science and Technology Institute (BISTI), NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research, Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research, Administrative Supplements to Existing NIH Grants and Cooperative Agreements, New and Early Stage Investigators Policies, Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Common Fund, NIH Basic Behavioral and Social Science Research Opportunity Network (OppNet), Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers, Stem Cell Information (PECASE), and the Trans-NIH Countermeasures Against Chemical Threats (CounterACT) program (333).\nThe NIH Common Fund has emerged as one approach to support trans-NIH programs and uses the same mechanisms of support. The NIH Common Fund is a specific component of the NIH budget and is managed by the Office of Strategic Coordination/Division of Program Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Coordination/Office of the NIH Director (329). Common Fund programs are short-term (usually ∼5 y), goal-driven strategic investments that are “intended to change paradigms, develop innovative tools and technologies, and/or provide fundamental foundations for research that can be used by the broad biomedical research community” (329). Then, an NIH institute, center, or office or multiple institutes, centers, and offices must continue the support of these time-limited programs.\nAs one example, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was a trans-NIH initiative supported by the NIH Common Fund from 2007 to 2016 (334). This project aimed to expand science on the microbiome. Initially funded as an initiative of the NIH Roadmap for Biomedical Research, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was originally established as a 5-y project with a budget of $150 million (335). The project began with a “jumpstart” phase in 2007 and a set of grants was funded in mid-2009 and additional demonstration project grants were awarded. These activities were supported by a Data Analysis and Coordination Center and a set of additional grants was awarded for developing new technologies, new software tools, and studying the ethical, legal, and social implications of this work. The grantees worked together in a highly cooperative consortium. Ultimately, this 10-y $215 million project spanned \u003e20 of the NIH institutes, centers, and offices and resulted in a \u003e40-fold increase in nonproject investment in microbiome research (336). That is, individual or multiple institutes, centers, and offices used program announcements or request for applications. Some of these funding mechanisms were supported by the Common Fund and others were additional commitments by the participating NIH institutes, centers, and offices from their own budgets. The Trans-NIH Microbiome Working Group established in 2012 provided a forum for coordinating NIH extramural research activities related to the human microbiome and continues to coordinate this work after the NIH Human Microbiome Project was completed. Notably, the NIH Human Microbiome Project identified several potential priority areas around food and the microbiome, but these topics have not yet been systematically pursued.\nThe Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) initiative is an example of a trans-NIH initiative (337), supported by staff within NIH and across federal working groups and providing funding for intramural and extramural research, training, and technology development. Between 2013 and 2019, this initiative supported \u003e700 research projects totaling ∼$1.3 billion through support across the NIH, including appropriations through the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114–255) (337). The BRAIN initiative is managed by 10 NIH institutes and centers, with coordination at multiple levels. Extramural program staff and institute and center directors meet regularly to integrate strategic planning, management, and a BRAIN Multi-Council Working Group and Neuroethics Working Group provide further input on a variety of issues.\nAnother trans-NIH example is the All of US Research Program (Public Law 115–31), directly supported through annual appropriations from Congress ($1.5 billion over 10 y) (Public Law 115–31). This initiative, supported and overseen by NIH, arose from recommendations by the NIH's Precision Medicine Initiative Working Group of the Advisory Committee to the Director (338). The program staff are based in the NIH Office of the Director, with a Trans-NIH Liaisons Coordinating Team made up of scientific leaders from across NIH and has an external advisory panel.\nA potential trans-NIH program in Precision Nutrition is being considered as an NIH Common Fund program for fiscal year 2021 (131, 339), and the NIH Director included Precision Nutrition in the NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). A new Program Director in the NIDDK ONR was hired in 2020 to lead this initiative.\n\nAdvantages\nLegislation is not required. A trans-NIH initiative can help galvanize NIH to develop a coordinated approach to a specific topic on nutrition and human health (e.g., see Table 2). Such an effort would generally be preceded by a careful—and separately useful—review of relevant NIH leadership, staffing, funding, external advisory mechanisms, and collaborative approaches available. A trans-NIH initiative brings new strategic planning, working groups, funding opportunities, training, and technology development. A trans-NIH initiative is complementary to other NIH and cross-governmental strategies to strengthen federal nutrition research. Such initiatives can also help build new or enhanced public–private partnerships.\n\nDisadvantages\nThe needs and opportunities across nutrition research are broad and complex, and a new trans-NIH initiative would cover 1 focused topic, such as, if funded, precision nutrition. Addressing the science gaps and opportunities for nutrition—a leading cause of disease in the US—will require greater and more sustained authority, coordination, resources, and collaboration than provided by a single initiative, especially one only limited to precision nutrition. Trans-NIH initiatives are generally time-limited, difficult to sustain, and not easily communicated to a broad range of external stakeholders. The long-term success of such initiatives can be dependent on a single leading NIH institute, center, and/or office to commit to carry that area of work forward after the initial investments.\n\nPath forward\nThe NIH Director could propose new trans-NIH budget initiatives for Congress to review; as noted earlier, Precision Nutrition is proposed in NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). Congress could authorize and appropriate funds for this proposed initiative or put forth support for another or additional trans-NIH initiative(s) focused on ≥1 areas of nutrition research. NIH institutes, centers, and offices can develop and collectively support trans-NIH initiatives. External support through the private and nongovernment sectors can also be mobilized through public–private partnerships."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CLO","denotations":[{"id":"T3","span":{"begin":132,"end":133},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T4","span":{"begin":780,"end":781},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T5","span":{"begin":1353,"end":1362},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CL_0000034"},{"id":"T6","span":{"begin":1492,"end":1495},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0051582"},{"id":"T7","span":{"begin":1614,"end":1615},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T8","span":{"begin":2271,"end":2276},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCBITaxon_9606"},{"id":"T9","span":{"begin":2300,"end":2301},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T10","span":{"begin":2523,"end":2528},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCBITaxon_9606"},{"id":"T11","span":{"begin":2578,"end":2579},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T12","span":{"begin":2597,"end":2598},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T13","span":{"begin":2652,"end":2653},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T14","span":{"begin":2684,"end":2685},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T15","span":{"begin":2787,"end":2797},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001658"},{"id":"T16","span":{"begin":2816,"end":2817},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T17","span":{"begin":2860,"end":2861},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T18","span":{"begin":3055,"end":3056},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T19","span":{"begin":3203,"end":3204},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T20","span":{"begin":3655,"end":3656},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T21","span":{"begin":3704,"end":3714},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001658"},{"id":"T22","span":{"begin":3730,"end":3735},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCBITaxon_9606"},{"id":"T23","span":{"begin":3799,"end":3804},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCBITaxon_9606"},{"id":"T24","span":{"begin":3856,"end":3861},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCBITaxon_9606"},{"id":"T25","span":{"begin":4020,"end":4025},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000955"},{"id":"T26","span":{"begin":4020,"end":4025},"obj":"http://www.ebi.ac.uk/efo/EFO_0000302"},{"id":"T27","span":{"begin":4083,"end":4088},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000955"},{"id":"T28","span":{"begin":4083,"end":4088},"obj":"http://www.ebi.ac.uk/efo/EFO_0000302"},{"id":"T29","span":{"begin":4118,"end":4119},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T30","span":{"begin":4511,"end":4514},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0053001"},{"id":"T31","span":{"begin":4531,"end":4536},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000955"},{"id":"T32","span":{"begin":4531,"end":4536},"obj":"http://www.ebi.ac.uk/efo/EFO_0000302"},{"id":"T33","span":{"begin":4755,"end":4756},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T34","span":{"begin":4757,"end":4762},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000955"},{"id":"T35","span":{"begin":4757,"end":4762},"obj":"http://www.ebi.ac.uk/efo/EFO_0000302"},{"id":"T36","span":{"begin":4846,"end":4847},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T37","span":{"begin":5306,"end":5307},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T38","span":{"begin":5395,"end":5398},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0051582"},{"id":"T39","span":{"begin":5427,"end":5428},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T40","span":{"begin":5689,"end":5690},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T41","span":{"begin":5813,"end":5814},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T42","span":{"begin":5870,"end":5871},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T43","span":{"begin":5896,"end":5897},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T44","span":{"begin":5930,"end":5935},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCBITaxon_9606"},{"id":"T45","span":{"begin":6010,"end":6011},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T46","span":{"begin":6166,"end":6167},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T47","span":{"begin":6297,"end":6298},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T48","span":{"begin":6604,"end":6605},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T49","span":{"begin":6645,"end":6652},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0009985"},{"id":"T50","span":{"begin":6761,"end":6762},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T51","span":{"begin":6909,"end":6910},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T52","span":{"begin":7085,"end":7086},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T53","span":{"begin":7187,"end":7188},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T54","span":{"begin":7688,"end":7695},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0009985"}],"text":"New trans-NIH initiative(s) in nutrition research\nTrans-NIH initiatives are efforts to promote collaborative research across NIH in a particular area of science. These initiatives can originate from the NIH Director; NIH institutes, centers, or offices; or Congress. Some of these initiatives engage with external stakeholders such as businesses and nonprofit foundations. The funding, leadership, and structures for trans-NIH initiatives tend to vary. Generally, trans-NIH programs utilize the same mechanisms of grant funding that NIH currently offers: research grants (R series), career development awards (K series), research training and fellowships (T \u0026 F series), program project/center grants (P series), and resource grants (various series) (333). NIH currently supports a variety of broad-reaching programs that are trans-NIH in nature; examples include Biomedical Information Science and Technology Institute (BISTI), NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research, Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research, Administrative Supplements to Existing NIH Grants and Cooperative Agreements, New and Early Stage Investigators Policies, Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Common Fund, NIH Basic Behavioral and Social Science Research Opportunity Network (OppNet), Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers, Stem Cell Information (PECASE), and the Trans-NIH Countermeasures Against Chemical Threats (CounterACT) program (333).\nThe NIH Common Fund has emerged as one approach to support trans-NIH programs and uses the same mechanisms of support. The NIH Common Fund is a specific component of the NIH budget and is managed by the Office of Strategic Coordination/Division of Program Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Coordination/Office of the NIH Director (329). Common Fund programs are short-term (usually ∼5 y), goal-driven strategic investments that are “intended to change paradigms, develop innovative tools and technologies, and/or provide fundamental foundations for research that can be used by the broad biomedical research community” (329). Then, an NIH institute, center, or office or multiple institutes, centers, and offices must continue the support of these time-limited programs.\nAs one example, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was a trans-NIH initiative supported by the NIH Common Fund from 2007 to 2016 (334). This project aimed to expand science on the microbiome. Initially funded as an initiative of the NIH Roadmap for Biomedical Research, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was originally established as a 5-y project with a budget of $150 million (335). The project began with a “jumpstart” phase in 2007 and a set of grants was funded in mid-2009 and additional demonstration project grants were awarded. These activities were supported by a Data Analysis and Coordination Center and a set of additional grants was awarded for developing new technologies, new software tools, and studying the ethical, legal, and social implications of this work. The grantees worked together in a highly cooperative consortium. Ultimately, this 10-y $215 million project spanned \u003e20 of the NIH institutes, centers, and offices and resulted in a \u003e40-fold increase in nonproject investment in microbiome research (336). That is, individual or multiple institutes, centers, and offices used program announcements or request for applications. Some of these funding mechanisms were supported by the Common Fund and others were additional commitments by the participating NIH institutes, centers, and offices from their own budgets. The Trans-NIH Microbiome Working Group established in 2012 provided a forum for coordinating NIH extramural research activities related to the human microbiome and continues to coordinate this work after the NIH Human Microbiome Project was completed. Notably, the NIH Human Microbiome Project identified several potential priority areas around food and the microbiome, but these topics have not yet been systematically pursued.\nThe Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) initiative is an example of a trans-NIH initiative (337), supported by staff within NIH and across federal working groups and providing funding for intramural and extramural research, training, and technology development. Between 2013 and 2019, this initiative supported \u003e700 research projects totaling ∼$1.3 billion through support across the NIH, including appropriations through the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114–255) (337). The BRAIN initiative is managed by 10 NIH institutes and centers, with coordination at multiple levels. Extramural program staff and institute and center directors meet regularly to integrate strategic planning, management, and a BRAIN Multi-Council Working Group and Neuroethics Working Group provide further input on a variety of issues.\nAnother trans-NIH example is the All of US Research Program (Public Law 115–31), directly supported through annual appropriations from Congress ($1.5 billion over 10 y) (Public Law 115–31). This initiative, supported and overseen by NIH, arose from recommendations by the NIH's Precision Medicine Initiative Working Group of the Advisory Committee to the Director (338). The program staff are based in the NIH Office of the Director, with a Trans-NIH Liaisons Coordinating Team made up of scientific leaders from across NIH and has an external advisory panel.\nA potential trans-NIH program in Precision Nutrition is being considered as an NIH Common Fund program for fiscal year 2021 (131, 339), and the NIH Director included Precision Nutrition in the NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). A new Program Director in the NIDDK ONR was hired in 2020 to lead this initiative.\n\nAdvantages\nLegislation is not required. A trans-NIH initiative can help galvanize NIH to develop a coordinated approach to a specific topic on nutrition and human health (e.g., see Table 2). Such an effort would generally be preceded by a careful—and separately useful—review of relevant NIH leadership, staffing, funding, external advisory mechanisms, and collaborative approaches available. A trans-NIH initiative brings new strategic planning, working groups, funding opportunities, training, and technology development. A trans-NIH initiative is complementary to other NIH and cross-governmental strategies to strengthen federal nutrition research. Such initiatives can also help build new or enhanced public–private partnerships.\n\nDisadvantages\nThe needs and opportunities across nutrition research are broad and complex, and a new trans-NIH initiative would cover 1 focused topic, such as, if funded, precision nutrition. Addressing the science gaps and opportunities for nutrition—a leading cause of disease in the US—will require greater and more sustained authority, coordination, resources, and collaboration than provided by a single initiative, especially one only limited to precision nutrition. Trans-NIH initiatives are generally time-limited, difficult to sustain, and not easily communicated to a broad range of external stakeholders. The long-term success of such initiatives can be dependent on a single leading NIH institute, center, and/or office to commit to carry that area of work forward after the initial investments.\n\nPath forward\nThe NIH Director could propose new trans-NIH budget initiatives for Congress to review; as noted earlier, Precision Nutrition is proposed in NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). Congress could authorize and appropriate funds for this proposed initiative or put forth support for another or additional trans-NIH initiative(s) focused on ≥1 areas of nutrition research. NIH institutes, centers, and offices can develop and collectively support trans-NIH initiatives. External support through the private and nongovernment sectors can also be mobilized through public–private partnerships."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PubTator","denotations":[{"id":"881","span":{"begin":2271,"end":2287},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"882","span":{"begin":2523,"end":2539},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"883","span":{"begin":3730,"end":3746},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"884","span":{"begin":3799,"end":3815},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"885","span":{"begin":3856,"end":3872},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"887","span":{"begin":5620,"end":5639},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"889","span":{"begin":5930,"end":5935},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"891","span":{"begin":7472,"end":7491},"obj":"Disease"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A881","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"881","obj":"Tax:646099"},{"id":"A882","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"882","obj":"Tax:646099"},{"id":"A883","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"883","obj":"Tax:646099"},{"id":"A884","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"884","obj":"Tax:646099"},{"id":"A885","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"885","obj":"Tax:646099"},{"id":"A887","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"887","obj":"MESH:D010300"},{"id":"A889","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"889","obj":"Tax:9606"},{"id":"A891","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"891","obj":"MESH:D010300"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"Tax","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/taxonomy/"},{"prefix":"MESH","uri":"https://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/"},{"prefix":"Gene","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/"},{"prefix":"CVCL","uri":"https://web.expasy.org/cellosaurus/CVCL_"}],"text":"New trans-NIH initiative(s) in nutrition research\nTrans-NIH initiatives are efforts to promote collaborative research across NIH in a particular area of science. These initiatives can originate from the NIH Director; NIH institutes, centers, or offices; or Congress. Some of these initiatives engage with external stakeholders such as businesses and nonprofit foundations. The funding, leadership, and structures for trans-NIH initiatives tend to vary. Generally, trans-NIH programs utilize the same mechanisms of grant funding that NIH currently offers: research grants (R series), career development awards (K series), research training and fellowships (T \u0026 F series), program project/center grants (P series), and resource grants (various series) (333). NIH currently supports a variety of broad-reaching programs that are trans-NIH in nature; examples include Biomedical Information Science and Technology Institute (BISTI), NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research, Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research, Administrative Supplements to Existing NIH Grants and Cooperative Agreements, New and Early Stage Investigators Policies, Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Common Fund, NIH Basic Behavioral and Social Science Research Opportunity Network (OppNet), Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers, Stem Cell Information (PECASE), and the Trans-NIH Countermeasures Against Chemical Threats (CounterACT) program (333).\nThe NIH Common Fund has emerged as one approach to support trans-NIH programs and uses the same mechanisms of support. The NIH Common Fund is a specific component of the NIH budget and is managed by the Office of Strategic Coordination/Division of Program Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Coordination/Office of the NIH Director (329). Common Fund programs are short-term (usually ∼5 y), goal-driven strategic investments that are “intended to change paradigms, develop innovative tools and technologies, and/or provide fundamental foundations for research that can be used by the broad biomedical research community” (329). Then, an NIH institute, center, or office or multiple institutes, centers, and offices must continue the support of these time-limited programs.\nAs one example, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was a trans-NIH initiative supported by the NIH Common Fund from 2007 to 2016 (334). This project aimed to expand science on the microbiome. Initially funded as an initiative of the NIH Roadmap for Biomedical Research, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was originally established as a 5-y project with a budget of $150 million (335). The project began with a “jumpstart” phase in 2007 and a set of grants was funded in mid-2009 and additional demonstration project grants were awarded. These activities were supported by a Data Analysis and Coordination Center and a set of additional grants was awarded for developing new technologies, new software tools, and studying the ethical, legal, and social implications of this work. The grantees worked together in a highly cooperative consortium. Ultimately, this 10-y $215 million project spanned \u003e20 of the NIH institutes, centers, and offices and resulted in a \u003e40-fold increase in nonproject investment in microbiome research (336). That is, individual or multiple institutes, centers, and offices used program announcements or request for applications. Some of these funding mechanisms were supported by the Common Fund and others were additional commitments by the participating NIH institutes, centers, and offices from their own budgets. The Trans-NIH Microbiome Working Group established in 2012 provided a forum for coordinating NIH extramural research activities related to the human microbiome and continues to coordinate this work after the NIH Human Microbiome Project was completed. Notably, the NIH Human Microbiome Project identified several potential priority areas around food and the microbiome, but these topics have not yet been systematically pursued.\nThe Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) initiative is an example of a trans-NIH initiative (337), supported by staff within NIH and across federal working groups and providing funding for intramural and extramural research, training, and technology development. Between 2013 and 2019, this initiative supported \u003e700 research projects totaling ∼$1.3 billion through support across the NIH, including appropriations through the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114–255) (337). The BRAIN initiative is managed by 10 NIH institutes and centers, with coordination at multiple levels. Extramural program staff and institute and center directors meet regularly to integrate strategic planning, management, and a BRAIN Multi-Council Working Group and Neuroethics Working Group provide further input on a variety of issues.\nAnother trans-NIH example is the All of US Research Program (Public Law 115–31), directly supported through annual appropriations from Congress ($1.5 billion over 10 y) (Public Law 115–31). This initiative, supported and overseen by NIH, arose from recommendations by the NIH's Precision Medicine Initiative Working Group of the Advisory Committee to the Director (338). The program staff are based in the NIH Office of the Director, with a Trans-NIH Liaisons Coordinating Team made up of scientific leaders from across NIH and has an external advisory panel.\nA potential trans-NIH program in Precision Nutrition is being considered as an NIH Common Fund program for fiscal year 2021 (131, 339), and the NIH Director included Precision Nutrition in the NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). A new Program Director in the NIDDK ONR was hired in 2020 to lead this initiative.\n\nAdvantages\nLegislation is not required. A trans-NIH initiative can help galvanize NIH to develop a coordinated approach to a specific topic on nutrition and human health (e.g., see Table 2). Such an effort would generally be preceded by a careful—and separately useful—review of relevant NIH leadership, staffing, funding, external advisory mechanisms, and collaborative approaches available. A trans-NIH initiative brings new strategic planning, working groups, funding opportunities, training, and technology development. A trans-NIH initiative is complementary to other NIH and cross-governmental strategies to strengthen federal nutrition research. Such initiatives can also help build new or enhanced public–private partnerships.\n\nDisadvantages\nThe needs and opportunities across nutrition research are broad and complex, and a new trans-NIH initiative would cover 1 focused topic, such as, if funded, precision nutrition. Addressing the science gaps and opportunities for nutrition—a leading cause of disease in the US—will require greater and more sustained authority, coordination, resources, and collaboration than provided by a single initiative, especially one only limited to precision nutrition. Trans-NIH initiatives are generally time-limited, difficult to sustain, and not easily communicated to a broad range of external stakeholders. The long-term success of such initiatives can be dependent on a single leading NIH institute, center, and/or office to commit to carry that area of work forward after the initial investments.\n\nPath forward\nThe NIH Director could propose new trans-NIH budget initiatives for Congress to review; as noted earlier, Precision Nutrition is proposed in NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). Congress could authorize and appropriate funds for this proposed initiative or put forth support for another or additional trans-NIH initiative(s) focused on ≥1 areas of nutrition research. NIH institutes, centers, and offices can develop and collectively support trans-NIH initiatives. External support through the private and nongovernment sectors can also be mobilized through public–private partnerships."}

{"project":"LitCovid-sentences","denotations":[{"id":"T1097","span":{"begin":0,"end":49},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1098","span":{"begin":50,"end":161},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1099","span":{"begin":162,"end":266},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1100","span":{"begin":267,"end":372},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1101","span":{"begin":373,"end":452},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1102","span":{"begin":453,"end":756},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1103","span":{"begin":757,"end":1471},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1104","span":{"begin":1472,"end":1590},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1105","span":{"begin":1591,"end":1812},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1106","span":{"begin":1813,"end":2101},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1107","span":{"begin":2102,"end":2246},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1108","span":{"begin":2247,"end":2380},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1109","span":{"begin":2381,"end":2436},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1110","span":{"begin":2437,"end":2628},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1111","span":{"begin":2629,"end":2780},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1112","span":{"begin":2781,"end":3022},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1113","span":{"begin":3023,"end":3087},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1114","span":{"begin":3088,"end":3277},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1115","span":{"begin":3278,"end":3398},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1116","span":{"begin":3399,"end":3586},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1117","span":{"begin":3587,"end":3838},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1118","span":{"begin":3839,"end":4015},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1119","span":{"begin":4016,"end":4311},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1120","span":{"begin":4312,"end":4526},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1121","span":{"begin":4527,"end":4630},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1122","span":{"begin":4631,"end":4866},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1123","span":{"begin":4867,"end":5056},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1124","span":{"begin":5057,"end":5237},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1125","span":{"begin":5238,"end":5426},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1126","span":{"begin":5427,"end":5688},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1127","span":{"begin":5689,"end":5771},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1128","span":{"begin":5773,"end":5783},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1129","span":{"begin":5784,"end":5812},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1130","span":{"begin":5813,"end":5963},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1131","span":{"begin":5964,"end":6165},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1132","span":{"begin":6166,"end":6296},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1133","span":{"begin":6297,"end":6425},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1134","span":{"begin":6426,"end":6507},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1135","span":{"begin":6509,"end":6522},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1136","span":{"begin":6523,"end":6700},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1137","span":{"begin":6701,"end":6981},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1138","span":{"begin":6982,"end":7124},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1139","span":{"begin":7125,"end":7316},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1140","span":{"begin":7318,"end":7330},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1141","span":{"begin":7331,"end":7540},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1142","span":{"begin":7541,"end":7730},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1143","span":{"begin":7731,"end":7827},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T1144","span":{"begin":7828,"end":7949},"obj":"Sentence"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"http://pubannotation.org/ontology/tao.owl#"}],"text":"New trans-NIH initiative(s) in nutrition research\nTrans-NIH initiatives are efforts to promote collaborative research across NIH in a particular area of science. These initiatives can originate from the NIH Director; NIH institutes, centers, or offices; or Congress. Some of these initiatives engage with external stakeholders such as businesses and nonprofit foundations. The funding, leadership, and structures for trans-NIH initiatives tend to vary. Generally, trans-NIH programs utilize the same mechanisms of grant funding that NIH currently offers: research grants (R series), career development awards (K series), research training and fellowships (T \u0026 F series), program project/center grants (P series), and resource grants (various series) (333). NIH currently supports a variety of broad-reaching programs that are trans-NIH in nature; examples include Biomedical Information Science and Technology Institute (BISTI), NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research, Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research, Administrative Supplements to Existing NIH Grants and Cooperative Agreements, New and Early Stage Investigators Policies, Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Common Fund, NIH Basic Behavioral and Social Science Research Opportunity Network (OppNet), Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers, Stem Cell Information (PECASE), and the Trans-NIH Countermeasures Against Chemical Threats (CounterACT) program (333).\nThe NIH Common Fund has emerged as one approach to support trans-NIH programs and uses the same mechanisms of support. The NIH Common Fund is a specific component of the NIH budget and is managed by the Office of Strategic Coordination/Division of Program Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Coordination/Office of the NIH Director (329). Common Fund programs are short-term (usually ∼5 y), goal-driven strategic investments that are “intended to change paradigms, develop innovative tools and technologies, and/or provide fundamental foundations for research that can be used by the broad biomedical research community” (329). Then, an NIH institute, center, or office or multiple institutes, centers, and offices must continue the support of these time-limited programs.\nAs one example, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was a trans-NIH initiative supported by the NIH Common Fund from 2007 to 2016 (334). This project aimed to expand science on the microbiome. Initially funded as an initiative of the NIH Roadmap for Biomedical Research, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was originally established as a 5-y project with a budget of $150 million (335). The project began with a “jumpstart” phase in 2007 and a set of grants was funded in mid-2009 and additional demonstration project grants were awarded. These activities were supported by a Data Analysis and Coordination Center and a set of additional grants was awarded for developing new technologies, new software tools, and studying the ethical, legal, and social implications of this work. The grantees worked together in a highly cooperative consortium. Ultimately, this 10-y $215 million project spanned \u003e20 of the NIH institutes, centers, and offices and resulted in a \u003e40-fold increase in nonproject investment in microbiome research (336). That is, individual or multiple institutes, centers, and offices used program announcements or request for applications. Some of these funding mechanisms were supported by the Common Fund and others were additional commitments by the participating NIH institutes, centers, and offices from their own budgets. The Trans-NIH Microbiome Working Group established in 2012 provided a forum for coordinating NIH extramural research activities related to the human microbiome and continues to coordinate this work after the NIH Human Microbiome Project was completed. Notably, the NIH Human Microbiome Project identified several potential priority areas around food and the microbiome, but these topics have not yet been systematically pursued.\nThe Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) initiative is an example of a trans-NIH initiative (337), supported by staff within NIH and across federal working groups and providing funding for intramural and extramural research, training, and technology development. Between 2013 and 2019, this initiative supported \u003e700 research projects totaling ∼$1.3 billion through support across the NIH, including appropriations through the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114–255) (337). The BRAIN initiative is managed by 10 NIH institutes and centers, with coordination at multiple levels. Extramural program staff and institute and center directors meet regularly to integrate strategic planning, management, and a BRAIN Multi-Council Working Group and Neuroethics Working Group provide further input on a variety of issues.\nAnother trans-NIH example is the All of US Research Program (Public Law 115–31), directly supported through annual appropriations from Congress ($1.5 billion over 10 y) (Public Law 115–31). This initiative, supported and overseen by NIH, arose from recommendations by the NIH's Precision Medicine Initiative Working Group of the Advisory Committee to the Director (338). The program staff are based in the NIH Office of the Director, with a Trans-NIH Liaisons Coordinating Team made up of scientific leaders from across NIH and has an external advisory panel.\nA potential trans-NIH program in Precision Nutrition is being considered as an NIH Common Fund program for fiscal year 2021 (131, 339), and the NIH Director included Precision Nutrition in the NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). A new Program Director in the NIDDK ONR was hired in 2020 to lead this initiative.\n\nAdvantages\nLegislation is not required. A trans-NIH initiative can help galvanize NIH to develop a coordinated approach to a specific topic on nutrition and human health (e.g., see Table 2). Such an effort would generally be preceded by a careful—and separately useful—review of relevant NIH leadership, staffing, funding, external advisory mechanisms, and collaborative approaches available. A trans-NIH initiative brings new strategic planning, working groups, funding opportunities, training, and technology development. A trans-NIH initiative is complementary to other NIH and cross-governmental strategies to strengthen federal nutrition research. Such initiatives can also help build new or enhanced public–private partnerships.\n\nDisadvantages\nThe needs and opportunities across nutrition research are broad and complex, and a new trans-NIH initiative would cover 1 focused topic, such as, if funded, precision nutrition. Addressing the science gaps and opportunities for nutrition—a leading cause of disease in the US—will require greater and more sustained authority, coordination, resources, and collaboration than provided by a single initiative, especially one only limited to precision nutrition. Trans-NIH initiatives are generally time-limited, difficult to sustain, and not easily communicated to a broad range of external stakeholders. The long-term success of such initiatives can be dependent on a single leading NIH institute, center, and/or office to commit to carry that area of work forward after the initial investments.\n\nPath forward\nThe NIH Director could propose new trans-NIH budget initiatives for Congress to review; as noted earlier, Precision Nutrition is proposed in NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). Congress could authorize and appropriate funds for this proposed initiative or put forth support for another or additional trans-NIH initiative(s) focused on ≥1 areas of nutrition research. NIH institutes, centers, and offices can develop and collectively support trans-NIH initiatives. External support through the private and nongovernment sectors can also be mobilized through public–private partnerships."}

{"project":"2_test","denotations":[{"id":"32687145-19819907-2017942","span":{"begin":2623,"end":2626},"obj":"19819907"},{"id":"32687145-30808411-2017943","span":{"begin":3272,"end":3275},"obj":"30808411"}],"text":"New trans-NIH initiative(s) in nutrition research\nTrans-NIH initiatives are efforts to promote collaborative research across NIH in a particular area of science. These initiatives can originate from the NIH Director; NIH institutes, centers, or offices; or Congress. Some of these initiatives engage with external stakeholders such as businesses and nonprofit foundations. The funding, leadership, and structures for trans-NIH initiatives tend to vary. Generally, trans-NIH programs utilize the same mechanisms of grant funding that NIH currently offers: research grants (R series), career development awards (K series), research training and fellowships (T \u0026 F series), program project/center grants (P series), and resource grants (various series) (333). NIH currently supports a variety of broad-reaching programs that are trans-NIH in nature; examples include Biomedical Information Science and Technology Institute (BISTI), NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research, Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research, Administrative Supplements to Existing NIH Grants and Cooperative Agreements, New and Early Stage Investigators Policies, Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Common Fund, NIH Basic Behavioral and Social Science Research Opportunity Network (OppNet), Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers, Stem Cell Information (PECASE), and the Trans-NIH Countermeasures Against Chemical Threats (CounterACT) program (333).\nThe NIH Common Fund has emerged as one approach to support trans-NIH programs and uses the same mechanisms of support. The NIH Common Fund is a specific component of the NIH budget and is managed by the Office of Strategic Coordination/Division of Program Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Coordination/Office of the NIH Director (329). Common Fund programs are short-term (usually ∼5 y), goal-driven strategic investments that are “intended to change paradigms, develop innovative tools and technologies, and/or provide fundamental foundations for research that can be used by the broad biomedical research community” (329). Then, an NIH institute, center, or office or multiple institutes, centers, and offices must continue the support of these time-limited programs.\nAs one example, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was a trans-NIH initiative supported by the NIH Common Fund from 2007 to 2016 (334). This project aimed to expand science on the microbiome. Initially funded as an initiative of the NIH Roadmap for Biomedical Research, the NIH Human Microbiome Project was originally established as a 5-y project with a budget of $150 million (335). The project began with a “jumpstart” phase in 2007 and a set of grants was funded in mid-2009 and additional demonstration project grants were awarded. These activities were supported by a Data Analysis and Coordination Center and a set of additional grants was awarded for developing new technologies, new software tools, and studying the ethical, legal, and social implications of this work. The grantees worked together in a highly cooperative consortium. Ultimately, this 10-y $215 million project spanned \u003e20 of the NIH institutes, centers, and offices and resulted in a \u003e40-fold increase in nonproject investment in microbiome research (336). That is, individual or multiple institutes, centers, and offices used program announcements or request for applications. Some of these funding mechanisms were supported by the Common Fund and others were additional commitments by the participating NIH institutes, centers, and offices from their own budgets. The Trans-NIH Microbiome Working Group established in 2012 provided a forum for coordinating NIH extramural research activities related to the human microbiome and continues to coordinate this work after the NIH Human Microbiome Project was completed. Notably, the NIH Human Microbiome Project identified several potential priority areas around food and the microbiome, but these topics have not yet been systematically pursued.\nThe Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) initiative is an example of a trans-NIH initiative (337), supported by staff within NIH and across federal working groups and providing funding for intramural and extramural research, training, and technology development. Between 2013 and 2019, this initiative supported \u003e700 research projects totaling ∼$1.3 billion through support across the NIH, including appropriations through the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114–255) (337). The BRAIN initiative is managed by 10 NIH institutes and centers, with coordination at multiple levels. Extramural program staff and institute and center directors meet regularly to integrate strategic planning, management, and a BRAIN Multi-Council Working Group and Neuroethics Working Group provide further input on a variety of issues.\nAnother trans-NIH example is the All of US Research Program (Public Law 115–31), directly supported through annual appropriations from Congress ($1.5 billion over 10 y) (Public Law 115–31). This initiative, supported and overseen by NIH, arose from recommendations by the NIH's Precision Medicine Initiative Working Group of the Advisory Committee to the Director (338). The program staff are based in the NIH Office of the Director, with a Trans-NIH Liaisons Coordinating Team made up of scientific leaders from across NIH and has an external advisory panel.\nA potential trans-NIH program in Precision Nutrition is being considered as an NIH Common Fund program for fiscal year 2021 (131, 339), and the NIH Director included Precision Nutrition in the NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). A new Program Director in the NIDDK ONR was hired in 2020 to lead this initiative.\n\nAdvantages\nLegislation is not required. A trans-NIH initiative can help galvanize NIH to develop a coordinated approach to a specific topic on nutrition and human health (e.g., see Table 2). Such an effort would generally be preceded by a careful—and separately useful—review of relevant NIH leadership, staffing, funding, external advisory mechanisms, and collaborative approaches available. A trans-NIH initiative brings new strategic planning, working groups, funding opportunities, training, and technology development. A trans-NIH initiative is complementary to other NIH and cross-governmental strategies to strengthen federal nutrition research. Such initiatives can also help build new or enhanced public–private partnerships.\n\nDisadvantages\nThe needs and opportunities across nutrition research are broad and complex, and a new trans-NIH initiative would cover 1 focused topic, such as, if funded, precision nutrition. Addressing the science gaps and opportunities for nutrition—a leading cause of disease in the US—will require greater and more sustained authority, coordination, resources, and collaboration than provided by a single initiative, especially one only limited to precision nutrition. Trans-NIH initiatives are generally time-limited, difficult to sustain, and not easily communicated to a broad range of external stakeholders. The long-term success of such initiatives can be dependent on a single leading NIH institute, center, and/or office to commit to carry that area of work forward after the initial investments.\n\nPath forward\nThe NIH Director could propose new trans-NIH budget initiatives for Congress to review; as noted earlier, Precision Nutrition is proposed in NIH's congressional budget justification for fiscal year 2021 (131). Congress could authorize and appropriate funds for this proposed initiative or put forth support for another or additional trans-NIH initiative(s) focused on ≥1 areas of nutrition research. NIH institutes, centers, and offices can develop and collectively support trans-NIH initiatives. External support through the private and nongovernment sectors can also be mobilized through public–private partnerships."}