↓ Skip to main content

Are we really “eating well with Canada’s food guide”?

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
20 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
Are we really “eating well with Canada’s food guide”?
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5540-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joyce J. Slater, Adriana N. Mudryj

Abstract

Canada's Food Guide (CFG) has been an important health promotion tool for over seventy years. The most recent version was released in 2007. This study examined Canadians' exposure to, knowledge, and use of CFG. Data came from the Canadian Community Health Survey's Rapid Response on the Awareness and Usage of Canada's Food Guide, which included 10,098 Canadians ≥12 y in all ten provinces. Questions were asked on familiarity, awareness and usage of CFG and Canada's Food Guide for First Nations, Inuit and Métis, as well as healthy eating principles and behaviours. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to observe counts and differences among key demographic variables. More than 80% of Canadians have heard of CFG however significantly more women than men were aware of the Guide. Most knew that 'Vegetables and Fruit' had the most recommended servings and that dark green vegetables should be consumed daily; however fewer than half knew this of orange vegetables. Just under one third had a copy in their homes, and the most common sources for obtaining CFG were child's school and health professional/trainer. Those who consulted CFG recently were more likely to consume the recommended servings of vegetables and fruits, and to state that their eating habits were 'much better' than one year previously. CFG has "brand recognition" among Canadians however there are gaps between awareness and eating behaviours. The new Food Guide could consider additional dissemination tools including social media, videos and workbooks tailored to various age groups, demographic groups and settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 20%
Student > Master 18 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 32 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 15%
Arts and Humanities 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 37 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 25 July 2019.
All research outputs
#1,658,597
of 24,981,585 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,844
of 16,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,958
of 336,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#53
of 321 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,981,585 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,643 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 336,562 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 321 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.