↓ Skip to main content

Environmental interventions for altering eating behaviours of employees in the workplace: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Obesity Reviews, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
7 policy sources
twitter
12 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
guideline
2 clinical guideline sources

Readers on

mendeley
208 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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.
Article details
Title
Environmental interventions for altering eating behaviours of employees in the workplace: a systematic review
Published in
Obesity Reviews, November 2016
DOI 10.1111/obr.12470
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Environmental, or 'choice-architecture', interventions aim to change behaviour by changing properties/contents of the environment and are commonly used in the workplace to promote healthy behaviours in employees. The present review aimed to evaluate and synthesize the evidence surrounding the effectiveness of environmental interventions targeting eating behaviour in the workplace. A systematic search identified 8157 articles, of which 22 were included in the current review. All included studies were coded according to risk of bias and reporting quality and were classified according to the emergent typology of choice-architecture interventions. More than half of included studies (13/22) reported significant changes in primary measures of eating behaviour (increased fruit/veg consumption, increased sales of healthy options and reduction in calories purchased). However, only one study produced a small significant improvement in weight/body mass index. Many studies had a high or unknown risk of bias; reporting of interventions was suboptimal; and the only trial to measure compensatory behaviours found that intervention participants who ate less during the intervention ate more out with the workplace later in the day. Hence, we conclude that more rigorous, well-reported studies that account for compensatory behaviours are needed to fully understand the impact of environmental interventions on diet and importantly on weight/body mass index outcomes.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 208 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 208 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 19%
Researcher 25 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 5%
Other 33 16%
Unknown 74 36%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 10%
Social Sciences 19 9%
Psychology 19 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 4%
Other 36 17%
Unknown 82 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 22 May 2025.
All research outputs
#1,484,229
of 34,231,580 outputs
Outputs from Obesity Reviews
#524
of 2,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,309
of 454,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obesity Reviews
#8
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,231,580 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 454,659 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 25 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 68% of its contemporaries.