↓ Skip to main content

Developing dimensions for a multicomponent multidisciplinary approach to obesity management: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Developing dimensions for a multicomponent multidisciplinary approach to obesity management: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Public Health, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4834-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anita J. Cochrane, Bob Dick, Neil A. King, Andrew P. Hills, David J. Kavanagh

Abstract

There have been consistent recommendations for multicomponent and multidisciplinary approaches for obesity management. However, there is no clear agreement on the components, disciplines or processes to be considered within such an approach. In this study, we explored multicomponent and multidisciplinary approaches through an examination of knowledge, skills, beliefs, and recommendations of stakeholders involved in obesity management. These stakeholders included researchers, practitioners, educators, and patients. We used qualitative action research methods, including convergent interviewing and observation, to assist the process of inquiry. The consensus was that a multicomponent and multidisciplinary approach should be based on four central meta-components (patient, practitioner, process, and environmental factors), and specific components of these factors were identified. Psychologists, dieticians, exercise physiologists and general practitioners were nominated as key practitioners to be included. A complex condition like obesity requires that multiple components be addressed, and that both patients and multiple disciplines are involved in developing solutions. Implementing cycles of continuous improvement to deal with complexity, instead of trying to control for it, offers an effective way to deal with complex, changing multisystem problems like 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Researcher 4 5%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 27 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 21 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 16%
Psychology 8 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 27 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 October 2017.
All research outputs
#14,956,881
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,991
of 14,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,658
of 325,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#120
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,988 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 325,925 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.