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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Cost-Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Fruit and Vegetable Consumption
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, November 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0014148 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda J. Cobiac, Theo Vos, J. Lennert Veerman |
| Abstract |
Fruits and vegetables are an essential part of the human diet, but many people do not consume the recommended serves to prevent cardiovascular disease and cancer. In this research, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness of interventions to promote fruit and vegetable consumption to determine which interventions are good value for money, and by how much current strategies can reduce the population disease burden. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nigeria | 1 | 17% |
| Belgium | 1 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| Romania | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 141 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 31 | 21% |
| Researcher | 28 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 23 | 16% |
| Unknown | 24 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 24 | 16% |
| Unknown | 35 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 17 July 2023.
All research outputs
#929,372
of 24,192,521 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#12,355
of 208,107 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,226
of 187,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#59
of 1,005 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,192,521 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 208,107 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 187,041 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 1,005 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 94% of its contemporaries.