↓ Skip to main content

Using the RE-AIM framework to evaluate physical activity public health programs in México

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 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
Using the RE-AIM framework to evaluate physical activity public health programs in México
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1474-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edtna Jauregui, Ann M Pacheco, Erica G Soltero, Teresia M O’Connor, Cynthia M Castro, Paul A Estabrooks, Lorna H McNeill, Rebecca E Lee

Abstract

Physical activity (PA) public health programming has been widely used in Mexico; however, few studies have documented individual and organizational factors that might be used to evaluate their public health impact. The RE-AIM framework is an evaluation tool that examines individual and organizational factors of public health programs. The purpose of this study was to use the RE-AIM framework to determine the degree to which PA programs in Mexico reported individual and organizational factors and to investigate whether reporting differed by the program's funding source. Public health programs promoting PA were systematically identified during 2008-2013 and had to have an active program website. Initial searches produced 23 possible programs with 12 meeting inclusion criteria. A coding sheet was developed to capture behavioral, outcome and RE-AIM indicators from program websites. In addition to targeting PA, five (42%) programs also targeted dietary habits and the most commonly reported outcome was change in body composition (58%). Programs reported an average of 11.1 (±3.9) RE-AIM indicator items (out of 27 total). On average, 45% reported reach indicators, 34% reported efficacy/effectiveness indicators, 60% reported adoption indicators, 40% reported implementation indicators, and 35% reported maintenance indicators. The proportion of RE-AIM indicators reported did not differ significantly for programs that were government supported (M = 10, SD = 3.1) and programs that were partially or wholly privately or corporately supported (M = 12.0, SD = 4.4). While reach and adoption of these programs were most commonly reported, there is a need for stronger evaluation of behavioral and health outcomes before the public health impact of these programs can be established.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 127 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Researcher 8 6%
Student > Postgraduate 7 5%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 36 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 24 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 15%
Sports and Recreations 15 12%
Social Sciences 9 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 38 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 16 April 2015.
All research outputs
#5,791,611
of 23,325,355 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,748
of 15,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,741
of 256,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#92
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,325,355 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,205 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 62% 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 256,141 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 252 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 63% of its contemporaries.