↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of tailored-print interventions to promote physical activity: a systematic review of randomised trials

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, October 2011
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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 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
Efficacy of tailored-print interventions to promote physical activity: a systematic review of randomised trials
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, October 2011
DOI 10.1186/1479-5868-8-113
Pubmed ID
Authors

Camille E Short, Erica L James, Ronald C Plotnikoff, Afaf Girgis, Short CE, James EL, Plotnikoff RC, Girgis A

Abstract

Computer-tailored physical activity interventions are becoming increasingly popular. Recent reviews have comprehensively synthesised published research on computer-tailored interventions delivered via interactive technology (e.g. web-based programs) but there is a paucity of synthesis for interventions delivered via traditional print-based media in the physical activity domain (i.e. tailored-print interventions). The current study provides a systematic review of the tailored-print literature, to identify key factors relating to efficacy in tailored-print physical activity interventions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 %
Japan 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 100 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 31%
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Master 14 14%
Other 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 11 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 18%
Social Sciences 14 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Sports and Recreations 7 7%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 14 14%

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 19 November 2011.
All research outputs
#5,188,040
of 21,328,399 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#1,316
of 1,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,687
of 132,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#9
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,328,399 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 1,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 132,583 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 30 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 73% of its contemporaries.