↓ Skip to main content

The challenges of nutrition policymaking

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
29 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
The challenges of nutrition policymaking
Published in
Nutrition Journal, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12937-015-0001-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanne L Slavin

Abstract

In my over three decades of work in the field of food and nutrition, I have participated in many efforts that seek new policy initiatives in the hopes that these programs can curb rates of obesity and chronic disease and help consumers make healthier dietary choices. Because of the profound effect that many of these policies have on consumers, the food environment, federal nutrition assistance programs and subsequent policy and regulatory recommendations, it is imperative that only the strongest, best available evidence is used to set policy. This review evaluates methods by which current nutrition policies use scientific research as well as provides recommendations for how best to ensure future nutrition policies are truly science-based and likely to have a meaningful impact on public health. Specifically, this review will: Describe the current food and nutrition policy environment in the US Examine how science is used in federal food and nutrition policymaking efforts, using the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) as an example Describe strong versus weak science as well as what types of studies are most appropriate for use in policymaking Discuss the potential effects and consequences of making policy recommendations in the absence of scientific consensus or agreement Make recommendations to support the present and ongoing development of science-based policy likely to positively impact public health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 98 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 23%
Student > Bachelor 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Researcher 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 22 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 28 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 01 November 2017.
All research outputs
#1,158,891
of 24,838,271 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#332
of 1,488 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,203
of 363,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#11
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,838,271 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,488 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 363,476 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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 62% of its contemporaries.