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 |
Why Are Some Population Interventions for Diet and Obesity More Equitable and Effective Than Others? The Role of Individual Agency
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS Medicine, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001990 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jean Adams, Oliver Mytton, Martin White, Pablo Monsivais |
| Abstract |
Jean Adams and colleagues argue that population interventions that require individuals to use a low level of agency to benefit are likely to be most effective and most equitable. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 360 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 Kingdom | 141 | 39% |
| United States | 21 | 6% |
| Canada | 17 | 5% |
| Australia | 12 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 9 | 3% |
| Ireland | 5 | 1% |
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| Denmark | 2 | <1% |
| India | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 19 | 5% |
| Unknown | 129 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 182 | 51% |
| Scientists | 100 | 28% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 65 | 18% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 12 | 3% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 487 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 10 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 473 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 70 | 14% |
| Researcher | 67 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 64 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 43 | 9% |
| Other | 23 | 5% |
| Other | 72 | 15% |
| Unknown | 148 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 103 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 54 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 47 | 10% |
| Psychology | 25 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 4% |
| Other | 58 | 12% |
| Unknown | 179 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 355. 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 11 March 2024.
All research outputs
#92,562
of 25,813,008 outputs
Outputs from PLOS Medicine
#236
of 5,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,737
of 316,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS Medicine
#5
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,813,008 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 77.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 316,556 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.