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 |
Theory of planned behaviour variables and objective walking behaviour do not show seasonal variation in a randomised controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-14-120 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefanie L Williams, David P French |
| Abstract |
Longitudinal studies have shown that objectively measured walking behaviour is subject to seasonal variation, with people walking more in summer compared to winter. Seasonality therefore may have the potential to bias the results of randomised controlled trials if there are not adequate statistical or design controls. Despite this there are no studies that assess the impact of seasonality on walking behaviour in a randomised controlled trial, to quantify the extent of such bias. Further there have been no studies assessing how season impacts on the psychological predictors of walking behaviour to date. The aim of the present study was to assess seasonal differences in a) objective walking behaviour and b) Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) variables during a randomised controlled trial of an intervention to promote walking. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 50% |
| Iraq | 1 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 93 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 17% |
| Researcher | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 22 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 13% |
| Psychology | 10 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 21% |
| Unknown | 27 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 17 February 2014.
All research outputs
#7,044,446
of 23,340,595 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,382
of 15,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,002
of 310,107 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#115
of 253 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,340,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,202 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 310,107 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 253 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.