↓ Skip to main content

Myths, Presumptions, and Facts about Obesity

Overview of attention for article published in New England Journal of Medicine, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 25,239)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
122 news outlets
blogs
28 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
942 tweeters
facebook
164 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
20 Google+ users
reddit
3 Redditors
pinterest
2 Pinners
video
5 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
280 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1018 Mendeley
citeulike
9 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
Myths, Presumptions, and Facts about Obesity
Published in
New England Journal of Medicine, January 2013
DOI 10.1056/nejmsa1208051
Pubmed ID
Authors

Krista Casazza, Kevin R. Fontaine, Arne Astrup, Leann L. Birch, Andrew W. Brown, Michelle M. Bohan Brown, Nefertiti Durant, Gareth Dutton, E. Michael Foster, Steven B. Heymsfield, Kerry McIver, Tapan Mehta, Nir Menachemi, P.K. Newby, Russell Pate, Barbara J. Rolls, Bisakha Sen, Daniel L. Smith, Diana M. Thomas, David B. Allison

Abstract

Many beliefs about obesity persist in the absence of supporting scientific evidence (presumptions); some persist despite contradicting evidence (myths). The promulgation of unsupported beliefs may yield poorly informed policy decisions, inaccurate clinical and public health recommendations, and an unproductive allocation of research resources and may divert attention away from useful, evidence-based information.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 942 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 1,018 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 33 3%
Brazil 12 1%
United Kingdom 10 <1%
Spain 7 <1%
Italy 6 <1%
Netherlands 5 <1%
Canada 5 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
Japan 3 <1%
Other 25 2%
Unknown 909 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 188 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 139 14%
Other 115 11%
Student > Master 114 11%
Student > Bachelor 84 8%
Other 378 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 447 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 140 14%
Psychology 85 8%
Unspecified 76 7%
Social Sciences 61 6%
Other 209 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1973. 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 14 May 2019.
All research outputs
#748
of 13,094,151 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#39
of 25,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6
of 244,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#1
of 313 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,094,151 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,239 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 62.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 244,685 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 313 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.