↓ Skip to main content

Weight bias: a call to action

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Eating Disorders, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#28 of 955)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
twitter
74 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
194 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
Weight bias: a call to action
Published in
Journal of Eating Disorders, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40337-016-0112-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angela S. Alberga, Shelly Russell-Mayhew, Kristin M. von Ranson, Lindsay McLaren

Abstract

Weight-related issues (including excess weight, disordered eating and body concerns) are often considered as comprising distinct domains of 'obesity' and 'eating disorders'. In this commentary we argue that the concept of weight bias is an important variable when considering wellbeing across the spectrum of weight-related issues. We make the following six points in support of this argument: i) weight bias is common and has adverse health consequences, ii) shaming individuals for their body weight does not motivate positive behaviour change, iii) internalized weight bias is particularly problematic, iv) public health interventions, if not carefully thought out, can perpetuate weight bias, v) weight bias is a manifestation of social inequity, and vi) action on weight bias requires an upstream, population-level approach. To achieve sustainable reductions in weight bias at a population level, substantive modifications and collaborative efforts in multiple settings must be initiated. We provide several examples of population-level interventions to reduce weight bias.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 74 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 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 193 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 20%
Student > Bachelor 27 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 8%
Researcher 14 7%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 49 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 16%
Social Sciences 18 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 5%
Other 25 13%
Unknown 61 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 116. 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 04 December 2023.
All research outputs
#359,023
of 25,391,471 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Eating Disorders
#28
of 955 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,921
of 318,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Eating Disorders
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,391,471 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 955 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 318,571 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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 99% of its contemporaries.