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 |
Field validation of secondary data sources: a novel measure of representativity applied to a Canadian food outlet database
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1479-5868-10-77 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christelle M Clary, Yan Kestens |
| Abstract |
Validation studies of secondary datasets used to characterize neighborhood food businesses generally evaluate how accurately the database represents the true situation on the ground. Depending on the research objectives, the characterization of the business environment may tolerate some inaccuracies (e.g. minor imprecisions in location or errors in business names). Furthermore, if the number of false negatives (FNs) and false positives (FPs) is balanced within a given area, one could argue that the database still provides a "fair" representation of existing resources in this area. Yet, traditional validation measures do not relax matching criteria, and treat FNs and FPs independently. Through the field validation of food businesses found in a Canadian database, this paper proposes alternative criteria for validity. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
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 06 July 2013.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#1,952
of 2,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,817
of 209,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#36
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 2,116 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.5. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 209,373 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.