↓ Skip to main content

A formative study to understand perspectives of families eligible for a pediatric obesity program: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 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 formative study to understand perspectives of families eligible for a pediatric obesity program: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5466-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel G. Tabak, Nishita Dsouza, Cynthia D. Schwarz, Karyn Quinn, Patricia Kristen, Debra Haire-Joshu

Abstract

Raising Well® (RW) was initiated in 2015 by Envolve PeopleCare™ at the request of health plans seeking a solution to work with families on Medicaid that have a child with overweight or obesity. RW uses expert clinical coaches via phone contact to deliver an educational intervention promoting lifestyle change to families with at least one overweight or obese child in an eligible Medicaid health plan. This gives RW significant potential for reach and population impact. This project aimed to understand how to maximize this impact by exploring perspectives of RW, using a conceptual framework informed by the Conceptual Model of Implementation Research, including assessment of the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of RW; determining satisfaction among those experiencing coaching; identifying reasons individuals do not participate; and developing recommendations to enhance interest and participation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 70 RW-eligible families across four states, who were described as: active participants, respondents who dropped or stopped RW, and RW non-participants. Following the interviews, the transcripts were coded inductively and deductively using a grounded theory approach, considering themes from the conceptual framework; themes also emerged from the data. From this sample, 19 families reported to be active coaching participants, 24 had dropped coaching, and 27 were RW non-participants. A number of themes were identified. Feasibility themes included coaches' flexibility and willingness to work with the family's schedule. Acceptability themes suggest providing actionable strategies tailored to the family's context and needs, beyond just nutrition information and tips, early in the coaching relationship so the family perceives a benefit for continued participation. With regard to appropriateness, families were also interested in other methods of communication including email, texting, and in person visits. Access to resources for activity and healthy eating in their local community was also recommended. RW has the potential to improve health and promote wellness. To enhance the impact of this program, RW could incorporate these findings to promote feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness and improve program implementation. Strategies may include modifying the information provided or the mode of delivering the information.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 20%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 25 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 16%
Social Sciences 11 13%
Psychology 6 7%
Sports and Recreations 5 6%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 27 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 October 2019.
All research outputs
#13,357,452
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,395
of 15,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,766
of 326,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#242
of 315 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,014 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 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 326,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 315 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.