↓ Skip to main content

Parents' beliefs about appropriate infant size, growth and feeding behaviour: implications for the prevention of childhood obesity

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2010
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 (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
251 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Parents' beliefs about appropriate infant size, growth and feeding behaviour: implications for the prevention of childhood obesity
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2010
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-10-711
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah A Redsell, Philippa Atkinson, Dilip Nathan, A Niroshan Siriwardena, Judy A Swift, Cris Glazebrook

Abstract

A number of risk factors are associated with the development of childhood obesity which can be identified during infancy. These include infant feeding practices, parental response to infant temperament and parental perception of infant growth and appetite. Parental beliefs and understanding are crucial determinants of infant feeding behaviour; therefore any intervention would need to take account of their views. This study aimed to explore UK parents' beliefs concerning their infant's size, growth and feeding behaviour and parental receptiveness to early intervention aimed at reducing the risk of childhood obesity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 251 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 248 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 15%
Student > Bachelor 37 15%
Researcher 28 11%
Student > Postgraduate 17 7%
Other 34 14%
Unknown 55 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 45 18%
Psychology 20 8%
Social Sciences 19 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 6%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 62 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 13 September 2011.
All research outputs
#3,577,964
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,893
of 14,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,431
of 179,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#27
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,732 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 179,680 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.