↓ Skip to main content

Youth peers put the “invent” into NutriBee’s online intervention

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#5 of 1,005)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
59 news outlets
twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Youth peers put the “invent” into NutriBee’s online intervention
Published in
Nutrition Journal, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12937-015-0031-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ingrid C Kohlstadt, Elizabeth T Anderson Steeves, Kerry Rice, Joel Gittelsohn, Liane M Summerfield, Preety Gadhoke

Abstract

Early adolescents perceive peers as credible and relatable. Peers therefore have a unique conduit to engage early adolescents in positive health behaviors through nutrition learning such as that recommended by the U.S. Institute of Medicine (IOM). We developed an online, peer leader component to an existing in-person preventive nutrition intervention called NutriBee. We reasoned that youth ages 13-18 could create intervention materials that could remain engaging, credible and relatable to younger peers ages 10-12 online. Peer leaders could potentially derive health benefits from their service-learning experience. From 2013-2014 youth could apply online to relate a personal interest to nutrition, an opportunity promoted at NutriBee pilot sites and through social media. The peer leaders with diverse backgrounds honed original ideas into tangible projects with the support of adult subject-matter experts chosen by the youth. Nutrition expertise was provided by NutriBee staff who then also converted the youth-invented projects from various media into an online curriculum. 19 of 27 (70%) of selected youth from 12 states and diverse backgrounds, created an online curriculum comprising 10% of NutriBee's 20-hour intervention. All 19 online projects modeled 1 or more of NutriBee's 10 positive health behaviors; 8 evoked the chemosenses; 6 conveyed food texture; and 13 provided social context. Peer leaders perceived career advancement and service learning benefits. The dose, pedagogic approach, and project content align with the IOM recommendation. Youth created intervention materials which communicate positive health behaviors online in ways peers can adopt. In a customarily sight-sound digital platform, youth leveraged the senses of smell, taste and touch and social context important for food selection. Peer leaders derived health benefit, as indirectly assessed by IOM criteria.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 102 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 21%
Researcher 17 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 19 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 16%
Social Sciences 14 14%
Psychology 9 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 6%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 24 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 470. 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 26 September 2017.
All research outputs
#14,548
of 11,828,942 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#5
of 1,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#340
of 219,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#1
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,828,942 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 219,445 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.