↓ Skip to main content

Food neophobia: impact on food habits and acceptance of healthy foods in schoolchildren.

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrición Hospitalaria, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Food neophobia: impact on food habits and acceptance of healthy foods in schoolchildren.
Published in
Nutrición Hospitalaria, September 2014
DOI 10.3305/nh.2015.31.1.7481
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alejandra Rodríguez-Tadeo, Begoña Patiño Villena, Rene Urquidez-Romero, María Elena Vidaña-Gaytán, María Jesús Periago Caston, Gaspar Ros Berruezo, Eduardo González Martinez-Lacuesta

Abstract

In children, food neophobia may affect food choices and limit the variety of the diet as well as affect the sensory acceptance of new foods. To identify the impact of food neophobia in food habits and preferences of healthy food in school canteens users in the city of Murcia. A total of 242 children in the second and third cycle of primary education (8-12 years), were included, stratified by sex and school year. A survey of habits and food preferences, food neophobia and acceptance of foods commonly consumed in the dining room was applied. In addition, a sensory test was conducted and the consumption of salads and fruits in the room was measured by the weighing method. The prevalence of neophobia was 16%, without difference by sex, academic year, time to use service, parental origin and being overweight or underweight. Food neophobia was associated with a detrimental effect on the consumption of vegetables and fruit, the taste for vegetables and lower consumption of cereals and cereal at breakfast and preferably less fruit and vegetables (p<0.05). A higher level of neophobia less acceptance was given to foods like chicken and lentils (p<0.05), fruit, salads and legumes (p<0.001). Food neophobia did not affect the hedonic acceptance of fruit and salads consumed in the cafeteria. It is necessary to integrate this information to stakeholders to ensure an improvement in the consumption of healthy foods.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 26%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Researcher 4 5%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 32 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 35 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 April 2020.
All research outputs
#5,859,761
of 23,204,238 outputs
Outputs from Nutrición Hospitalaria
#78
of 399 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,321
of 252,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrición Hospitalaria
#7
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,204,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 399 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 252,214 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.