↓ Skip to main content

Hierarchical multiple informants models: examining food environment contributions to the childhood obesity epidemic

Overview of attention for article published in Statistics in Medicine, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Hierarchical multiple informants models: examining food environment contributions to the childhood obesity epidemic
Published in
Statistics in Medicine, September 2013
DOI 10.1002/sim.5967
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Methods for multiple informants help to estimate the marginal effect of each multiple source predictor and formally compare the strength of their association with an outcome. We extend multiple informant methods to the case of hierarchical data structures to account for within cluster correlation. We apply the proposed method to examine the relationship between features of the food environment near schools and children's body mass index z-scores (BMIz). Specifically, we compare the associations between two different features of the food environment (fast food restaurants and convenience stores) with BMIz and investigate how the association between the number of fast food restaurants or convenience stores and child's BMIz varies across distance from a school. The newly developed methodology enhances the types of research questions that can be asked by investigators studying effects of environment on childhood obesity and can be applied to other fields.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 52 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 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 12%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Psychology 4 8%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 12 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 15 September 2013.
All research outputs
#22,385,843
of 27,387,710 outputs
Outputs from Statistics in Medicine
#3,228
of 4,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,129
of 214,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Statistics in Medicine
#43
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,387,710 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,263 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 214,632 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.