| Title |
Restricting marketing to children: Consensus on policy interventions to address obesity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Public Health Policy, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1057/jphp.2013.9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kim D Raine, Tim Lobstein, Jane Landon, Monique Potvin Kent, Suzie Pellerin, Timothy Caulfield, Diane Finegood, Lyne Mongeau, Neil Neary, John C Spence |
| Abstract |
Obesity presents major challenges for public health and the evidence is strong. Lessons from tobacco control indicate a need for changing the policy and environments to make healthy choices easier and to create more opportunities for children to achieve healthy weights. In April 2011, the Alberta Policy Coalition for Chronic Disease Prevention convened a consensus conference on environmental determinants of obesity such as marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to children. We examine the political environment, evidence, issues, and challenges of placing restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages within Canada. We recommend a national regulatory system prohibiting commercial marketing of foods and beverages to children and suggest that effective regulations must set minimum standards, monitor compliance, and enact penalties for non-compliance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 14 | 40% |
| United States | 4 | 11% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 9% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 25 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 20% |
| Scientists | 3 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 190 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 185 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 42 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 18% |
| Researcher | 26 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 11% |
| Other | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 26 | 14% |
| Unknown | 32 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 29 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 26 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 26 | 14% |
| Unknown | 43 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 67. 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 08 October 2021.
All research outputs
#647,463
of 25,761,363 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Public Health Policy
#25
of 821 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,169
of 205,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Public Health Policy
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,761,363 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 821 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 205,986 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.