↓ Skip to main content

Using political science to progress public health nutrition: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Public Health Nutrition, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
Using political science to progress public health nutrition: a systematic review
Published in
Public Health Nutrition, October 2015
DOI 10.1017/s1368980015002712
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine Cullerton, Timothy Donnet, Amanda Lee, Danielle Gallegos

Abstract

Poor dietary intake is the most important behavioural risk factor affecting health globally. Despite this, there has been little investment in public health nutrition policy actions. Policy process theories from the field of political science can aid understanding why policy decisions have occurred and identify how to influence ongoing or future initiatives. The present review aims to examine public health nutrition policy literature and identify whether a policy process theory has been used to analyse the process. Electronic databases were searched systematically for studies examining policy making in public health nutrition in high-income, democratic countries. International, national, state and local government jurisdictions within high-income, democratic countries. Individuals and organisations involved in the nutrition policy-making process. Sixty-three studies met the eligibility criteria, most were conducted in the USA and a majority focused on obesity. The analysis demonstrates an accelerating trend in the number of nutrition policy papers published annually and an increase in the diversity of nutrition topics examined. The use of policy process theory was observed from 2003; however, it was utilised by only 14 % of the reviewed papers. There is limited research into the nutrition policy process in high-income countries. While there has been a small increase in the use of policy process theory from 2003, an opportunity to expand its use is evident. We suggest that nutrition policy making would benefit from a pragmatic approach that ensures those trying to influence or understand the policy-making process are equipped with basic knowledge around these theories.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 20%
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Unspecified 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 13 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 17 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 20%
Unspecified 6 14%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 2 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 September 2016.
All research outputs
#987,048
of 12,479,613 outputs
Outputs from Public Health Nutrition
#358
of 2,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,603
of 250,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Public Health Nutrition
#16
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,479,613 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,115 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 250,575 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 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.