↓ Skip to main content

A randomized, controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of an online intervention targeting vitamin D intake, knowledge and status among young adults

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
230 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
A randomized, controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of an online intervention targeting vitamin D intake, knowledge and status among young adults
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12966-016-0443-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samantha Goodman, Barbara Morrongiello, Kelly Meckling

Abstract

Vitamin D plays a key role in bone health. Consuming adequate vitamin D during young adulthood is important due to the development of peak bone mass; however, many Canadian young adults do not meet vitamin D recommendations. This study aimed to improve knowledge, perceptions, dietary intake and blood concentrations of vitamin D among a sample of young adults. Using a pre-post design, 90 Ontario adults (38 men, 52 women; 18-25 years), were randomly assigned to intervention or control groups. Participants completed a socio-demographic survey, pre-post food frequency questionnaire, and a vitamin D knowledge questionnaire (3 time-points). The intervention group watched a video, received online information and tracked intake of vitamin D using a mobile application for 12 weeks. A sub-sample of participants completed pre-post blood 25(OH)D3 tests. Univariate ANOVA tested pre-post between-group differences in vitamin D intake and status. Repeated-measures ANOVA tested between-group differences in vitamin D knowledge and perceptions across 3 time-points. Mean vitamin D intake in the sample increased significantly from pre-test (M = 407, SD = 460 IU) to post-test (M = 619, SD = 655 IU), t(88) = 5.37, p < 0.001. Mean intake increased significantly more in the intervention than control group after controlling for gender and education, F(1, 85) = 4.09, p = 0.046. Mean blood vitamin D3 was significantly higher among non-Caucasian than Caucasian participants at baseline, t(56.7) = 3.49, p = 0.001. Mean blood vitamin D3 increased significantly from pre-test (M = 28, SD = 16 nmol/L) to post-test (M = 43, SD = 29 nmol/L), t(53) = 11.36, p < 0.001, but did not differ significantly between groups. The increase in vitamin D knowledge from time 1-3 was significantly higher in the intervention than control group (t(88) = 2.26, p = 0.03). The intervention group (M = 3.52, SE = 0.13) had higher overall perceived importance of vitamin D supplementation than the control (M = 3.16, SE = 0.12), F(1, 88) = 4.38, p = 0.04, ηp(2) = 0.05. Although recommendations suggest blood 25(OH)D3 concentrations of ≥50-75 nmol/L, vitamin D status was below national recommendations. While participating in an intervention did not improve vitamin D status, it led to increased vitamin D intake, knowledge and perceived importance of supplementation. ClinicalTrails.gov registration #: NCT02118129 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 230 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 230 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 15%
Student > Bachelor 31 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 7%
Researcher 14 6%
Other 34 15%
Unknown 83 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 35 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 13%
Psychology 21 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 3%
Other 36 16%
Unknown 94 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 August 2017.
All research outputs
#13,339,920
of 23,511,526 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#1,677
of 1,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,669
of 312,471 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#26
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,511,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,972 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.7. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 312,471 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.