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 |
Eating patterns in the Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Adult Health (ELSA-Brasil): an exploratory analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cadernos de Saúde Pública, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1590/0102-311x00066215 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Letícia de Oliveira Cardoso, Marilia Sá Carvalho, Oswaldo Gonçalves Cruz, Cristiane Melere, Vivian Cristine Luft, Maria del Carmen Bisi Molina, Carolina Perim de Faria, Isabela M. Benseñor, Sheila Maria Alvim Matos, Maria de Jesus Mendes da Fonseca, Rosane Harter Griep, Dóra Chor |
| Abstract |
The food consumption of 15,071 public employees was analyzed in six Brazilian cities participating in the baseline for Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Adult Health (ELSA-Brasil, 2008-2010) with the aim of identifying eating patterns and their relationship to socio-demographic variables. Multiple correspondence and cluster analysis were applied. Four patterns were identified, with their respective frequencies: "traditional" (48%); "fruits and vegetables" (25%); "pastry shop" (24%); and "diet/light" (5%) The "traditional" and "pastry shop" patterns were more frequent among men, younger individuals, and those with less schooling. "Fruits and vegetables" and "diet/light" were more frequent in women, older individuals, and those with more schooling. Our findings show the inclusion of new items in the "traditional" pattern and the appearance of the "low sugar/low fat" pattern among the eating habits of Brazilian workers, and signal socio-demographic and regional differences. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Researcher | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 39 | 83% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 39 | 83% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 June 2017.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#1,382
of 1,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,817
of 327,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#29
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,855 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 327,276 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.