| Title |
Calorie Postings in Chain Restaurants in a Low-Income Urban Neighborhood: Measuring Practical Utility and Policy Compliance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Urban Health, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11524-012-9671-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elizabeth Gross Cohn, Elaine L. Larson, Christina Araujo, Vanessa Sawyer, Olajide Williams |
| Abstract |
Current strategies for combating obesity include recent federal legislation mandating calorie count postings in chain restaurants. This study describes the current practice of menu board calorie postings in a low-income urban neighborhood, identifies the extent to which current practice complies with existing policy, and evaluates the practical utility of menu boards to consumers. We conclude that although most postings were legally compliant, they did not demonstrate utility. Menu postings for individual servings are easily understood, but complex math skills are needed to interpret meals designed to serve more than one person. In some items, calories doubled depending on flavor and the calorie posting did not give enough information to make healthier selections. We identified specific strategies to improve practical utility and provide recommendations for policy implementation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Suriname | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 17 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 14% |
| Psychology | 8 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 20 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 12 June 2012.
All research outputs
#1,166,638
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#172
of 1,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,354
of 155,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,279 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.3. 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 155,000 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.