↓ Skip to main content

A natural experiment to examine the impact of park renewal on park-use and park-based physical activity in a disadvantaged neighbourhood: the REVAMP study methods

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
169 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 natural experiment to examine the impact of park renewal on park-use and park-based physical activity in a disadvantaged neighbourhood: the REVAMP study methods
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-14-600
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jenny Veitch, Jo Salmon, Alison Carver, Anna Timperio, David Crawford, Elly Fletcher, Billie Giles-Corti

Abstract

Modifying the built environment by improving parks is potentially a sustainable way to increase population level physical activity. Despite considerable investment in parks and park renovations, few natural experiments on the impact of improving amenities on park use and park-based physical activity have been conducted. REVAMP is a natural experiment that aims to examine whether park improvement increases overall park usage, park-based physical activity and active travel to and from the park in the intervention compared with the control park over a two-year period; and to identify which specific aspects of the park refurbishment attracts park visitors and encourages park users to be more active. This paper describes the methods of the REVAMP study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 163 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 16%
Student > Master 27 16%
Researcher 23 14%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Professor 10 6%
Other 31 18%
Unknown 34 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 36 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 11%
Sports and Recreations 15 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 7%
Environmental Science 10 6%
Other 34 20%
Unknown 43 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 24 April 2016.
All research outputs
#1,661,943
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,820
of 14,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,801
of 228,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#38
of 279 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,832 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 228,650 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 279 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.