↓ Skip to main content

An overview of consumer attitudes and beliefs about plant food supplements

Overview of attention for article published in Food & Function, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
112 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
An overview of consumer attitudes and beliefs about plant food supplements
Published in
Food & Function, November 2011
DOI 10.1039/c1fo10109a
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The use of dietary supplements is increasing globally and this includes the use of plant food supplements (PFS). A variety of factors may be influencing this increased consumption including the increasing number of older people in society, mistrust in conventional medicine and the perception that natural is healthy. Consumer studies in this area are limited, with a focus on dietary supplements in general, and complicated by the use of certain plant food supplements as herbal medicines. Research indicates that higher use of dietary supplements has been associated with being female, being more educated, having a higher income, being white and being older, however the drivers for consumption of supplements are complex, being influenced by both demographic and health-related factors. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of current knowledge about the users and the determinants of usage of plant food supplements. With growing consumption of these products, the need for effective risk-benefit assessment becomes ever more important and an insight into who uses these types of products and why is an important starting point for any future science-based decisions made by policy makers, PFS manufacturers and ultimately by consumers themselves.

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 112 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 %
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 111 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 19%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Other 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 43 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 9%
Chemistry 8 7%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 47 42%
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 22 November 2011.
All research outputs
#22,633,878
of 27,701,496 outputs
Outputs from Food & Function
#3,115
of 5,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,651
of 161,415 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Food & Function
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,701,496 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,149 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 161,415 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.