↓ Skip to main content

Factores de riesgo del comportamiento y preparación de aficionados inscritos a carreras atléticas de fondo de 18 a 64 años en Bogotá, Colombia, 2014

Overview of attention for article published in Cadernos de Saúde Pública, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
9 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.
Title
Factores de riesgo del comportamiento y preparación de aficionados inscritos a carreras atléticas de fondo de 18 a 64 años en Bogotá, Colombia, 2014
Published in
Cadernos de Saúde Pública, April 2016
DOI 10.1590/0102-311x00066815
Pubmed ID
Authors

María del Pilar Ramírez-Góngora, Franklyn Edwin Prieto-Alvarado

Abstract

Participation in amateur street marathons has become increasingly popular and requires prior individual health risk assessment. The objective was to identify risk factors and readiness in registered runners. This was a cross-sectional study in a random sample (n = 510) of registered amateur runners 18-64 years of age, using a digital survey with IPAQ, Par-Q+, and STEPwise, with an expected physical inactivity rate of 35% (±5%). The study explored physical activity, (binge) alcohol consumption, fruit, vegetable, and salt intake, smoking, and readiness. Self-reported rates were: 97.4% recommended level of physical activity, 2.4% optimal fruit and vegetable intake, 3.7% smoking, and 44.1% binge drinking. 19.8% were Par-Q+ positive and 5.7% practiced supervised exercise. The analysis showed differences by age, sex, and socioeconomic status. Recreational runners followed the recommended levels of physical activity but did not score well on other risk factors. Prior evaluation of lifestyle-related risk factors and readiness provides a safer athletic strategy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 2 22%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Professor 1 11%
Unknown 5 56%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 2 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 11%
Unknown 6 67%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 June 2016.
All research outputs
#15,517,992
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#837
of 1,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,173
of 312,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#21
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,855 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 312,743 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.