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 |
Patterns and correlates of nutrition knowledge across five countries in the 2018 international food policy study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition Journal, March 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12937-023-00844-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jasmin Bhawra, Sharon I. Kirkpatrick, Marissa G. Hall, Lana Vanderlee, Christine M. White, David Hammond |
| Abstract |
Nutrition knowledge is an important determinant of diet-related behaviour; however, the use of disparate assessment tools creates challenges for comparing nutrition knowledge levels and correlates across studies, geographic contexts, and populations. Using the Food Processing Knowledge (FoodProK) score - a measure of nutrition knowledge based on consumers' ability to understand and apply the concept of food processing in a functional task - nutrition knowledge levels and associated correlates were assessed in five countries. Adults, aged ≥18 years, were recruited through the Nielsen Consumer Insights Global Panel in Australia (n = 3997), Canada (n = 4170), Mexico (n = 4044), the United Kingdom (UK) (n = 5363), and the United States (US) (n = 4527). Respondents completed web-based surveys in November-December 2018. Functional nutrition knowledge was measured using the FoodProK score. Linear regression models examined associations between FoodProK score and sociodemographic, dietary behaviours, and knowledge-related characteristics. FoodProK scores (maximum, 8 points) were highest in Canada (mean: 5.1) and Australia (5.0), followed by the UK (4.8), Mexico (4.7), and the US (4.6). Health literacy and self-rated nutrition knowledge were positively associated with FoodProK scores (p < .001). FoodProK scores were higher among those who reported vegetarian/other dietary practices (p < .001); made efforts to consume less sodium, trans fats, or sugars (p < .001); ≥60 years (p = 0.002), female (p < .001), and 'majority' ethnic group respondents in their respective countries (p < .001). This study found differences in consumers' ability to distinguish levels of food processing for common foods, with somewhat lower levels of nutrition knowledge in countries with the highest intake of highly processed foods. Nutrition knowledge differences based on consumer characteristics highlight the need for accessible policy interventions that support uptake of healthy eating efforts across populations to avoid exacerbating nutrition-related disparities. Tools such as the FoodProK can be used to evaluate the impact of policies targeting nutrition knowledge across contexts. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 2% |
| Researcher | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 31 | 63% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 9 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 31 | 63% |
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 26 May 2023.
All research outputs
#16,904,529
of 24,857,051 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#1,210
of 1,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,041
of 413,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,857,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,490 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.3. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 413,971 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.