↓ Skip to main content

Taxing Soft Drinks And Restricting Access To Vending Machines To Curb Child Obesity

Overview of attention for article published in Health Affairs, April 2010
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 (96th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
194 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.
Article details
Title
Taxing Soft Drinks And Restricting Access To Vending Machines To Curb Child Obesity
Published in
Health Affairs, April 2010
DOI 10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0725
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

One of the largest drivers of the current obesity epidemic is thought to be excessive consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages. Some have proposed vending machine restrictions and taxing soft drinks to curb children's consumption of soft drinks; to a large extent, these policies have not been evaluated empirically. We examine these policies using two nationally representative data sets and find no evidence that, as currently practiced, either is effective at reducing children's weight. We conclude by outlining changes that may increase their effectiveness, such as implementing comprehensive restrictions on access to soft drinks in schools and imposing higher tax rates than are currently in place in many jurisdictions.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 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 %
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 2 1%
India 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 187 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 45 23%
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Researcher 25 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 4%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 43 22%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 23 12%
Social Sciences 19 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 8%
Other 18 9%
Unknown 55 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 14 June 2024.
All research outputs
#1,275,809
of 29,461,039 outputs
Outputs from Health Affairs
#2,159
of 6,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,827
of 118,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Affairs
#20
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,461,039 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 6,878 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 68.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 118,443 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.