↓ Skip to main content

Dieting practices, weight perceptions, and body composition: A comparison of normal weight, overweight, and obese college females

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, March 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
104 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Dieting practices, weight perceptions, and body composition: A comparison of normal weight, overweight, and obese college females
Published in
Nutrition Journal, March 2006
DOI 10.1186/1475-2891-5-11
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brenda M Malinauskas, Thomas D Raedeke, Victor G Aeby, Jean L Smith, Matthew B Dallas

Abstract

Of concern to health educators is the suggestion that college females practice diet and health behaviors that contradict the 2005 dietary guidelines for Americans. In this regard, there remain gaps in the research related to dieting among college females. Namely, do normal weight individuals diet differently from those who are overweight or obese, and are there dieting practices used by females that can be adapted to promote a healthy body weight? Since it is well recognized that females diet, this study seeks to determine the dieting practices used among normal, overweight, and obese college females (do they diet differently) and identify dieting practices that could be pursued to help these females more appropriately achieve and maintain a healthy body weight.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 179 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 21%
Student > Bachelor 37 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 8%
Researcher 11 6%
Other 46 25%
Unknown 18 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 13%
Social Sciences 23 12%
Psychology 18 10%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 26 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 21 April 2015.
All research outputs
#249,380
of 5,021,388 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#172
of 783 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,394
of 4,007,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#172
of 777 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,021,388 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 783 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 4,007,126 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 777 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.