↓ Skip to main content

Evidence for validity of five secondary data sources for enumerating retail food outlets in seven American Indian Communities in North Carolina

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
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
Evidence for validity of five secondary data sources for enumerating retail food outlets in seven American Indian Communities in North Carolina
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1479-5868-9-137
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sheila E Fleischhacker, Daniel A Rodriguez, Kelly R Evenson, Amanda Henley, Ziya Gizlice, Dolly Soto, Gowri Ramachandran

Abstract

Most studies on the local food environment have used secondary sources to describe the food environment, such as government food registries or commercial listings (e.g., Reference USA). Most of the studies exploring evidence for validity of secondary retail food data have used on-site verification and have not conducted analysis by data source (e.g., sensitivity of Reference USA) or by food outlet type (e.g., sensitivity of Reference USA for convenience stores). Few studies have explored the food environment in American Indian communities. To advance the science on measuring the food environment, we conducted direct, on-site observations of a wide range of food outlets in multiple American Indian communities, without a list guiding the field observations, and then compared our findings to several types of secondary data.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 82 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 12%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 20 24%
Unknown 14 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 16%
Social Sciences 10 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 20 24%
Attention Score in Context

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 05 December 2012.
All research outputs
#18,323,689
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#1,841
of 1,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,149
of 275,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#79
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,922 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 275,933 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.