↓ Skip to main content

Indigenous and traditional plants: South African parents’ knowledge, perceptions and uses and their children’s sensory acceptance

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 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
Indigenous and traditional plants: South African parents’ knowledge, perceptions and uses and their children’s sensory acceptance
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, November 2013
DOI 10.1186/1746-4269-9-78
Pubmed ID
Abstract

The dietary shift from indigenous and traditional plants (ITPs) to cash crops and exotic plant food sources increases the risk of malnutrition and other nutrition-related non-communicable diseases, especially in poor rural communities. Farm communities in South Africa have been associated with poor nutritional status and extreme poverty. ITPs have been found to be affordable sources of several micronutrients. However, knowledge of and the use of these plants are declining, and little is known about the child's acceptance of dishes prepared with ITPs. This knowledge can be used to improve the general acceptance of ITPs. This study aimed to gain insight into parents' knowledge and perceptions and their use of ITPs in a farming community in the North West Province and to assess children's acceptance of and preference for dishes made with African leafy vegetables (ALVs) and Swiss chard.

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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Rwanda 1 <1%
Unknown 119 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 18%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 11 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 34%
Environmental Science 19 15%
Social Sciences 12 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 9%
Psychology 6 5%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 14 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 December 2013.
All research outputs
#2,442,801
of 6,575,269 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#214
of 429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,906
of 147,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#7
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,575,269 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 61st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 429 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 147,777 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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 57% of its contemporaries.