↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of Consumer Understanding of Different Front-of-Package Nutrition Labels, 2010–2011

Overview of attention for article published in Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice and Policy, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% 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 (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
4 policy sources
twitter
15 X users

Readers on

mendeley
150 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
Evaluation of Consumer Understanding of Different Front-of-Package Nutrition Labels, 2010–2011
Published in
Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice and Policy, September 2012
DOI 10.5888/pcd9.120015
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Governments throughout the world are using or considering various front-of-package (FOP) food labeling systems to provide nutrition information to consumers. Our web-based study tested consumer understanding of different FOP labeling systems.

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 15 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 150 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 %
Peru 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Luxembourg 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 145 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 17%
Researcher 21 14%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Other 7 5%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 31 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 17 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 10%
Psychology 15 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 8%
Other 36 24%
Unknown 39 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 08 June 2020.
All research outputs
#2,016,645
of 34,526,284 outputs
Outputs from Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice and Policy
#423
of 2,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,159
of 227,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice and Policy
#5
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,526,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.5. 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 227,046 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 20 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.