↓ Skip to main content

Exploring power and influence in nutrition policy in Australia

Overview of attention for article published in Obesity Reviews, October 2016
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
45 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Exploring power and influence in nutrition policy in Australia
Published in
Obesity Reviews, October 2016
DOI 10.1111/obr.12459
Pubmed ID
Authors

K. Cullerton, T. Donnet, A. Lee, D. Gallegos

Abstract

The food industry is often described as having more power and influence in nutrition policymaking than nutrition professionals, scientists and other practitioners working for the public interest; yet authors often allude to this point as an assumed truth, rather than an evidence-based fact. This paper applies social network analysis techniques to provide a concise evidence-based demonstration of the food industry's capacity to influence nutrition policymaking networks in Australia. Network analysis using four rounds of data collection was undertaken, and the capacity of individual actors and occupational categories to influence policy decision makers were analysed. Network graphs were developed using cluster analysis to identify the structure of clusters and the path distance of actors from decision makers. The assumed advantage for the 'food industry' was present both strategically in overall network position and with respect to the number of direct access points to 'decision makers', whereas 'nutrition professionals' were densely clustered together with limited links to key 'decision makers'. The results demonstrate that the food industry holds the strategic high ground in advocating their interests to policymakers in the contexts studied. Nutrition professionals may be hampered by their reliance on strong ties with other nutrition professionals as well as limited direct links to 'decision makers'.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 3%
Malaysia 1 3%
Unknown 29 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 19%
Unspecified 5 16%
Student > Master 5 16%
Other 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Other 9 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 10 32%
Unspecified 7 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 19%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 6 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 54. 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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#273,856
of 12,484,061 outputs
Outputs from Obesity Reviews
#113
of 1,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,562
of 265,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obesity Reviews
#5
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,484,061 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 265,792 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 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.