↓ Skip to main content

Addressing the policy cacophony does not require more evidence: an argument for reframing obesity as caloric overconsumption

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
28 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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.
Title
Addressing the policy cacophony does not require more evidence: an argument for reframing obesity as caloric overconsumption
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-1042
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacob J Shelley

Abstract

Numerous policies have been proposed to address the public health problem of obesity, resulting in a policy cacophony. The noise of so many policy options renders it difficult for policymakers to determine which policies warrant implementation. This has resulted in calls for more and better evidence to support obesity policy. However, it is not clear that evidence is the solution. This paper argues that to address the policy cacophony it is necessary to rethink the problem of obesity, and more specifically, how the problem of obesity is framed. This paper argues that the frame "obesity" be replaced by the frame "caloric overconsumption", concluding that the frame caloric overconsumption can overcome the obesity policy cacophony.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
New Zealand 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 81 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 22%
Researcher 17 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 7 8%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 5 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 23%
Social Sciences 19 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Psychology 6 7%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 11 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 05 March 2015.
All research outputs
#1,013,400
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,100
of 14,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,700
of 276,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#13
of 289 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,763 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 276,634 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 289 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 95% of its contemporaries.