↓ Skip to main content

Factors Influencing Food Choice in an Australian Aboriginal Community

Overview of attention for article published in Qualitative Health Research, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
16 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
553 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Factors Influencing Food Choice in an Australian Aboriginal Community
Published in
Qualitative Health Research, February 2014
DOI 10.1177/1049732314521901
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie Brimblecombe, Elaine Maypilama, Susan Colles, Maria Scarlett, Joanne Garnggulkpuy Dhurrkay, Jan Ritchie, Kerin O’Dea

Abstract

We explored with Aboriginal adults living in a remote Australian community the social context of food choice and factors perceived to shape food choice. An ethnographic approach of prolonged community engagement over 3 years was augmented by interviews. Our findings revealed that knowledge, health, and resources supporting food choice were considered "out of balance," and this imbalance was seen to manifest in a Western-imposed diet lacking variety and overrelying on familiar staples. Participants felt ill-equipped to emulate the traditional pattern of knowledge transfer through passing food-related wisdom to younger generations. The traditional food system was considered key to providing the framework for learning about the contemporary food environment. Practitioners seeking to improve diet and health outcomes for this population should attend to past and present contexts of food in nutrition education, support the educative role of caregivers, address the high cost of food, and support access to traditional foods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 553 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 5 <1%
United States 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 546 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 415 75%
Student > Master 18 3%
Researcher 13 2%
Student > Postgraduate 13 2%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 2%
Other 30 5%
Unknown 52 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 184 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 161 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 64 12%
Social Sciences 27 5%
Psychology 12 2%
Other 48 9%
Unknown 57 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 01 June 2021.
All research outputs
#2,803,204
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Qualitative Health Research
#263
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,526
of 243,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Qualitative Health Research
#5
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 243,043 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.