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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Food insecurity among veterans: Findings from the health and retirement study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The journal of nutrition, health & aging, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12603-017-0910-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Diana P. Brostow, E. Gunzburger, K.S. Thomas |
| Abstract |
We examined the prevalence of food insecurity in an older population, specifically assessing factors associated with food insecurity among U.S. military Veterans. Data from the 2012 wave of the Health and Retirement Study and the 2013 Health Care and Nutrition Mail Survey of 2560 male participants (1254 Veterans) were used to estimate the prevalence of food insecurity and to identify significant predictors of food insecurity among male Veterans. Among male Veterans, 6.4% reported food insecurity, compared to 11.9% of male non-veterans (p < 0.01). Younger age, difficulty with daily activities and depression were significantly associated with increased odds of food insecurity among male Veterans aged 50 to 64. In male Veterans age 65 years and older, current smoking, a psychiatric diagnosis and depression were significantly associated with increased odds of food insecurity. This study identified significant factors that may be used to target interventions to improve nutritional status among older male Veterans. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 10 | 67% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 67% |
| Scientists | 4 | 27% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 17 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 14% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 5% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 22 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 01 June 2022.
All research outputs
#2,445,415
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from The journal of nutrition, health & aging
#305
of 2,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,945
of 447,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The journal of nutrition, health & aging
#8
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 447,202 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.