↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of traditional versus mobile app self-monitoring of physical activity and dietary intake among overweight adults participating in an mHealth weight loss program

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
17 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
334 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
753 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of traditional versus mobile app self-monitoring of physical activity and dietary intake among overweight adults participating in an mHealth weight loss program
Published in
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, February 2013
DOI 10.1136/amiajnl-2012-001510
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabrielle M Turner-McGrievy, Michael W Beets, Justin B Moore, Andrew T Kaczynski, Daheia J Barr-Anderson, Deborah F Tate

Abstract

Self-monitoring of physical activity (PA) and diet are key components of behavioral weight loss programs. The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between diet (mobile app, website, or paper journal) and PA (mobile app vs no mobile app) self-monitoring and dietary and PA behaviors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 753 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 <1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 728 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 128 17%
Student > Master 125 17%
Student > Bachelor 122 16%
Researcher 75 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 44 6%
Other 132 18%
Unknown 127 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 145 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 113 15%
Psychology 67 9%
Computer Science 65 9%
Social Sciences 44 6%
Other 167 22%
Unknown 152 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 August 2019.
All research outputs
#1,204,139
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
#270
of 3,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,735
of 204,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
#5
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,301 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 204,956 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.