↓ Skip to main content

Singaporean Mothers’ Perception of Their Three-year-old Child’s Weight Status: A Cross-Sectional Study

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
Singaporean Mothers’ Perception of Their Three-year-old Child’s Weight Status: A Cross-Sectional Study
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0147563
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tuck Seng Cheng, See Ling Loy, Yin Bun Cheung, Jerry Kok Yen Chan, Mya Thway Tint, Keith M. Godfrey, Peter D. Gluckman, Kenneth Kwek, Seang Mei Saw, Yap-Seng Chong, Yung Seng Lee, Fabian Yap, Ngee Lek

Abstract

Inaccurate parental perception of their child's weight status is commonly reported in Western countries. It is unclear whether similar misperception exists in Asian populations. This study aimed to evaluate the ability of Singaporean mothers to accurately describe their three-year-old child's weight status verbally and visually. At three years post-delivery, weight and height of the children were measured. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated and converted into actual weight status using International Obesity Task Force criteria. The mothers were blinded to their child's measurements and asked to verbally and visually describe what they perceived was their child's actual weight status. Agreement between actual and described weight status was assessed using Cohen's Kappa statistic (κ). Of 1237 recruited participants, 66.4% (n = 821) with complete data on mothers' verbal and visual perceptions and children's anthropometric measurements were analysed. Nearly thirty percent of the mothers were unable to describe their child's weight status accurately. In verbal description, 17.9% under-estimated and 11.8% over-estimated their child's weight status. In visual description, 10.4% under-estimated and 19.6% over-estimated their child's weight status. Many mothers of underweight children over-estimated (verbal 51.6%; visual 88.8%), and many mothers of overweight and obese children under-estimated (verbal 82.6%; visual 73.9%), their child's weight status. In contrast, significantly fewer mothers of normal-weight children were inaccurate (verbal 16.8%; visual 8.8%). Birth order (p<0.001), maternal (p = 0.004) and child's weight status (p<0.001) were associated with consistently inaccurate verbal and visual descriptions. Singaporean mothers, especially those of underweight and overweight children, may not be able to perceive their young child's weight status accurately. To facilitate prevention of childhood obesity, educating parents and caregivers about their child's weight status is needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 16%
Student > Bachelor 15 14%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 24 22%
Unknown 25 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 16%
Psychology 12 11%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 30 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 January 2016.
All research outputs
#14,246,461
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#116,711
of 194,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,872
of 396,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,868
of 5,132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,886 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 396,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.