↓ Skip to main content

Promoting functional foods as acceptable alternatives to doping: potential for information-based social marketing approach

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, May 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
Promoting functional foods as acceptable alternatives to doping: potential for information-based social marketing approach
Published in
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, May 2022
DOI 10.1186/1550-2783-7-37
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ricky James, Declan P Naughton, Andrea Petróczi

Abstract

Substances with performance enhancing properties appear on a continuum, ranging from prohibited performance enhancing drugs (PED) through dietary supplements to functional foods (FF). Anti-doping messages designed to dissuade athletes from using PEDs have been typically based on moralising sport competition and/or employing scare campaigns with focus on the negative consequences. Campaigns offering comparable and acceptable alternatives are nonexistent, nor are athletes helped in finding these for themselves. It is timely that social marketing strategies for anti-doping prevention and intervention incorporate media messages that complement the existing approaches by promoting comparable and acceptable alternatives to doping. To facilitate this process, the aim of this study was to ascertain whether a single exposure knowledge-based information intervention led to increased knowledge and subsequently result in changes in beliefs and automatic associations regarding performance enhancements.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 108 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 23%
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Researcher 9 8%
Unspecified 6 5%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 19 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 25 22%
Social Sciences 13 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 26 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 January 2015.
All research outputs
#5,844,852
of 22,655,397 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#598
of 881 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,723
of 436,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#581
of 853 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,655,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 881 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.4. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 436,506 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 853 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.