↓ Skip to main content

Changing the Endpoints for Determining Effective Obesity Management

Overview of attention for article published in Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases, October 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 (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 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
Changing the Endpoints for Determining Effective Obesity Management
Published in
Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases, October 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.pcad.2014.10.002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Ross, Steve Blair, Louise de Lannoy, Jean-Pierre Després, Carl J. Lavie

Abstract

Health authorities worldwide recommend weight loss as a primary endpoint for effective obesity management. Despite a growing public awareness of the importance of weight loss and the spending of billions of dollars by Americans in attempts to lose weight, obesity prevalence continues to rise. In this report we argue that effective obesity management in today's environment will require a shift in focus from weight loss as the primary endpoint, to improvements in the causal behaviors; diet and exercise/physical activity (PA). We reason that increases in PA combined with a balanced diet are associated with improvement in many of the intermediate risk factors including cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) associated with obesity despite minimal or no weight loss. Consistent with this notion, we suggest that a focus on healthy behaviors for the prevention of additional weight gain may be an effective way of managing obesity in the short term.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 116 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 20%
Student > Bachelor 17 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Researcher 10 8%
Other 9 8%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 26 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 22 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 17%
Sports and Recreations 10 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 8%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 36 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,456,908
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases
#157
of 1,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,836
of 273,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases
#7
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,017 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 273,496 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.