↓ Skip to main content

Vitamin D: Australian dietitian's knowledge and practices

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition & Dietetics, June 2016
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 (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
guideline
2 clinical guideline sources

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Vitamin D: Australian dietitian's knowledge and practices
Published in
Nutrition & Dietetics, June 2016
DOI 10.1111/1747-0080.12291
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To survey dietitians on their knowledge and practices regarding vitamin D (VitD) intake, sources, supplementation and effect on disease state. An online survey was disseminated to members of the Dietitian Association Australia via the weekly online state newsletter during April 2015. Response rate was 3%, with 134 respondents completing the survey. The survey included questions about knowledge and current practices. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the results. Dietitians have good knowledge regarding dietary sources of VitD and roles in the body, but there is confusion around supplement doses for treatment and prevention of deficiency and sun exposure guidelines. Dietitians are well positioned to provide patients with advice on VitD supplementation and sun exposure practices, but not all are confident to provide this care. There is a need for clear and well-disseminated guidelines for VitD management by dietitians.

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 4 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 22 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 %
Australia 1 5%
Unknown 21 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 18%
Researcher 4 18%
Other 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 6 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 23%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Unknown 8 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 03 October 2019.
All research outputs
#4,667,937
of 32,375,021 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition & Dietetics
#135
of 698 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,768
of 337,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition & Dietetics
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,375,021 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 698 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. 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 337,186 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.