↓ Skip to main content

Consumers’ intention to use health recommendation systems to receive personalized nutrition advice

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 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
Consumers’ intention to use health recommendation systems to receive personalized nutrition advice
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-13-126
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sonja Wendel, Benedict GC Dellaert, Amber Ronteltap, Hans CM van Trijp

Abstract

Sophisticated recommendation systems are used more and more in the health sector to assist consumers in healthy decision making. In this study we investigate consumers' evaluation of hypothetical health recommendation systems that provide personalized nutrition advice. We examine consumers' intention to use such a health recommendation system as a function of options related to the underlying system (e.g. the type of company that generates the advice) as well as intermediaries (e.g. general practitioner) that might assist in using the system. We further explore if the effect of both the system and intermediaries on intention to use a health recommendation system are mediated by consumers' perceived effort, privacy risk, usefulness and enjoyment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Malaysia 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Luxembourg 1 1%
Unknown 84 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 25%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Student > Master 8 9%
Researcher 8 9%
Other 23 26%
Unknown 8 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 30 34%
Business, Management and Accounting 10 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 14 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 06 March 2014.
All research outputs
#2,439,867
of 11,309,368 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#958
of 3,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,140
of 129,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#31
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,309,368 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,587 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 129,864 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 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 67% of its contemporaries.