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 |
Farmers’ market use is associated with fruit and vegetable consumption in diverse southern rural communities
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition Journal, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-2891-13-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephanie B Jilcott Pitts, Alison Gustafson, Qiang Wu, Mariel Leah Mayo, Rachel K Ward, Jared T McGuirt, Ann P Rafferty, Mandee F Lancaster, Kelly R Evenson, Thomas C Keyserling, Alice S Ammerman |
| Abstract |
While farmers' markets are a potential strategy to increase access to fruits and vegetables in rural areas, more information is needed regarding use of farmers' markets among rural residents. Thus, this study's purpose was to examine (1) socio-demographic characteristics of participants; (2) barriers and facilitators to farmers' market shopping in southern rural communities; and (3) associations between farmers' market use with fruit and vegetable consumption and body mass index (BMI). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 2 | 67% |
| Belgium | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 142 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 38 | 26% |
| Researcher | 18 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 34 | 23% |
| Unknown | 18 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 34 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 24 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 37 | 25% |
| Unknown | 25 | 17% |
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 16 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,374,774
of 25,109,675 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#549
of 1,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,748
of 318,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#18
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,109,675 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 1,502 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 318,352 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.