FR 2024-30558

Overview

Title

National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

Agencies

ELI5 AI

The National Institute on Aging is having a private online meeting on February 20, 2025, to talk about how getting older affects walking and give out special money awards for research. This meeting is private to keep people's personal information safe, and you can ask Nesar Uddin Akanda if you have questions.

Summary AI

The National Institute on Aging has announced a closed meeting scheduled for February 20, 2025. The meeting will be held virtually to review grant applications, specifically focusing on research about age-related changes in gait biomechanics and their impact on walking. The closure is due to the potential discussion of confidential information and personal privacy concerns. Interested parties may contact Nesar Uddin Akanda for further details.

Type: Notice
Citation: 89 FR 104552
Document #: 2024-30558
Date:
Volume: 89
Pages: 104552-104552

AnalysisAI

The document titled "National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting" from the Federal Register announces a meeting on February 20, 2025, conducted by the National Institute on Aging (NIA), part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health. The meeting's focus is on evaluating grant applications regarding age-related changes in gait biomechanics and their effect on walking costs.

Summary of the Document

The notice informs that the meeting will be conducted virtually and will be closed to the public. This closure is justified under specific provisions of the U.S. Code to protect confidential business information and personal privacy. The contact person for further inquiries is Dr. Nesar Uddin Akanda, a Scientific Review Officer at the NIA.

Significant Issues and Concerns

  1. Lack of Abstract: The document lacks an abstract. An abstract could provide a concise and accessible summary of the meeting's aims and significance, improving understanding for the general public.

  2. Reasons for Closure: While the closure is legally justified to protect confidentiality and privacy, the document does not elaborate on why these concerns particularly necessitate a closed meeting, potentially impacting perceptions of transparency.

  3. Details on Grant Process: There is no information provided about the grant applicants or the criteria for grant selection. This could lead to concerns about the fairness and transparency of the grant-awarding process.

  4. Contact Information: Although contact information is available, the document might benefit from additional methods of contact or explanations about the Scientific Review Officer's role to ensure comprehensive public access.

  5. Technical Language: The document uses legal and technical terms which may not be fully understood by the general audience, such as "closed meeting" and references to specific sections of U.S.C. Further explanation of these terms could enhance public comprehension.

Impact on the Public

The meeting's outcome could have widespread implications for public health, particularly by potentially advancing understanding of age-related health issues. Improved biomechanics of walking might lead to better health outcomes for the elderly, thereby influencing healthcare policies and practices.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

  • Researchers and Scientists: This meeting is crucial for researchers focusing on aging and biomechanics. Successful grant applications may provide opportunities to advance their work and contribute significantly to understanding and improving elderly healthcare.

  • Elders and Healthcare Providers: The findings from this research could directly inform healthcare practices, potentially leading to better management strategies for mobility and independence in aging.

  • General Public: Understanding processes related to public funding allocation for scientific research can enhance civic engagement and trust in public institutions.

While the meeting is a standard procedure for scientific evaluation, some aspects of the notice could be improved to enhance public understanding and trust in governmental processes, even when such meetings need to be held privately for valid reasons.

Issues

  • • The document lacks an abstract, which could provide a succinct summary of the meeting's purpose and importance.

  • • The meeting is closed to the public without a detailed explanation beyond general allowances for confidentiality and privacy concerns. More specific reasoning could enhance transparency.

  • • The notice does not include any specific information about the parties involved in the grant applications or how grant recipients will be selected, which may raise concerns about potential favoritism.

  • • Contact information for the Scientific Review Officer is provided, but alternative contact methods or additional context on the role could improve accessibility and understanding.

  • • The language used in the document is generally clear, but terms like 'closed meeting' and references to specific sections of U.S.C. may benefit from further explanation for lay readers.

Statistics

Size

Pages: 1
Words: 312
Sentences: 13
Entities: 39

Language

Nouns: 118
Verbs: 17
Adjectives: 8
Adverbs: 2
Numbers: 26

Complexity

Average Token Length:
5.27
Average Sentence Length:
24.00
Token Entropy:
4.66
Readability (ARI):
18.50

Reading Time

about a minute or two