↓ Skip to main content

Development of tools to study personal weight control strategies: OxFAB taxonomy

Overview of attention for article published in Obesity, January 2016
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
24 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Development of tools to study personal weight control strategies: OxFAB taxonomy
Published in
Obesity, January 2016
DOI 10.1002/oby.21341
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jamie Hartmann-Boyce, Paul Aveyard, Constantinos Koshiaris, Susan A. Jebb

Abstract

To describe the development of the Oxford Food and Activity Behaviors (OxFAB) taxonomy and questionnaire to explore the cognitive and behavioral strategies used by individuals during weight management attempts. The taxonomy was constructed through a qualitative analysis of existing resources and a review of existing behavior change taxonomies and theories. The taxonomy was translated into a questionnaire to identify strategies used by individuals. Think-aloud interviews were conducted to test the face/concept validity of the questionnaire, and test-retest reliability was assessed in a sample of 138 participants. The OxFAB taxonomy consists of 117 strategies grouped into 23 domains. Compared to taxonomies used to describe interventions, around half of the domains and strategies identified are unique to the OxFAB taxonomy. The OxFAB questionnaire consists of 117 questions, one for each strategy from the taxonomy. Test-retest resulted in a mean PABAK score of 0.61 (SD 0.15). Questions were revised where appropriate. The OxFAB taxonomy and questionnaire provide a conceptual framework to identify the cognitive and behavioral strategies used by individuals during attempts at weight control.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 34 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 23%
Researcher 7 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Other 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 43%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 26%
Unspecified 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Other 4 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#879,997
of 13,628,470 outputs
Outputs from Obesity
#659
of 3,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,199
of 362,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obesity
#21
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,628,470 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,089 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 362,290 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.