↓ Skip to main content

“Feeling More Self-Confident, Cheerful and Safe. Experiences from a Health-Promoting Intervention in Community Dwelling Older Adults — A Qualitative Study

Overview of attention for article published in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 Mendeley
Title
“Feeling More Self-Confident, Cheerful and Safe. Experiences from a Health-Promoting Intervention in Community Dwelling Older Adults — A Qualitative Study
Published in
The journal of nutrition, health & aging, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s12603-017-0981-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Åsa von Berens, A. Koochek, M. Nydahl, R.A. Fielding, T. Gustafsson, D.R. Kirn, T. Cederholm, M. Södergren

Abstract

Studies show that regular exercise in combination with nutritional support can be effective in managing sarcopenia, which is age-related involuntary loss of skeletal muscle mass and strength. Qualitative investigations of participants' experiences from interventions in this domain are scarce. In this study, we explored older persons' experiences from an intervention designed to prevent sarcopenia, with the aim of capturing the participants' thoughts and opinions. A qualitative study embedded in the multicenter randomized clinical trial The Vitality and Vigor in the Elderly study, VIVE2. Focus group interviews were conducted. Manifest and latent content analyses were performed. Community dwelling older adults (n=20) 71-86 years of age with minor limitations in mobility. The experiences from the intervention were categorized and interpreted in one overall theme "Feeling more self-confident, cheerful and safe". The theme encompasses the categories psychological effects of participating in the intervention, physical effects of participating in the intervention, the importance of social support and the importance of a tailored set-up. The participants described their motives for participating in the intervention as being based on concerns regarding the negative health effects of continuing a sedentary lifestyle, difficulties of getting started on their own and lack of confidence in accomplishing change on their own. Participants also expressed that one main objective for participating was to lose weight. In this study we have captured the experiences of older adults with minor mobility limitations who participated in a lifestyle intervention. The experiences are interpreted in one overall theme "Feeling more self-confident, cheerful and safe". The central understanding of the participants' experiences was that the intervention affected them in several ways, both psychologically and physically, and that supporting factors included the social support, which became a prerequisite for success. A noticeable finding was the discrepancy between the motive of the participants, to lose weight, and the aim of the study, to improve muscle function. The expectation to lose weight seems to reflect what is commonly known as to be healthy. To our knowledge, at least in Sweden, there are no campaigns or public information highlighting the risks of sarcopenia and the complex issue of if, and when weight loss is desirable for older individuals. This finding highlights the importance of providing such information to this target group. The findings in this study provide valuable knowledge for research teams, practitioners and decision makers when designing and setting objectives for health-promoting interventions for older individuals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 139 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 15%
Student > Bachelor 19 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Researcher 10 7%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 45 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 26 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 12%
Sports and Recreations 13 9%
Psychology 8 6%
Social Sciences 7 5%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 55 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 September 2020.
All research outputs
#8,327,005
of 25,540,105 outputs
Outputs from The journal of nutrition, health & aging
#1,036
of 1,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,879
of 344,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The journal of nutrition, health & aging
#25
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,540,105 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,985 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 344,210 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.