↓ Skip to main content

Perceived barriers and facilitators of initiation of behavioral weight loss interventions among adults with obesity: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2018
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 (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 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
Perceived barriers and facilitators of initiation of behavioral weight loss interventions among adults with obesity: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5795-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Megan A. McVay, William S. Yancy, Gary G. Bennett, Seung-Hye Jung, Corrine I. Voils

Abstract

Evidence-based behavioral weight loss interventions are under-utilized. To inform efforts to increase uptake of these interventions, it is important to understand the perspectives of adults with obesity regarding barriers and facilitators of weight loss intervention initiation. We conducted a qualitative study in adults with obesity who had recently attempted weight loss either with assistance from an evidence-based behavioral intervention (intervention initiators) or without use of a formal intervention (intervention non-initiators). We recruited primary care patients, members of a commercial weight loss program, and members of a Veterans Affairs weight loss program. Intervention initiators and non-initiators were interviewed separately using a semi-structured interview guide that asked participants about barriers and facilitators of weight loss intervention initiation. Conversations were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were analyzed with qualitative content analysis. Two researchers used open coding to generate the code book on a subset of transcripts and a single researcher coded remaining transcripts. Codes were combined into subthemes, which were combined in to higher order themes. Intervention initiators and non-initiators were compared. We conducted three focus groups with participants who had initiated interventions (n = 26) and three focus groups (n = 24) and 8 individual interviews with participants who had not initiated interventions. Intervention initiators and non-initiators were, respectively, 65% and 37.5% white, 62% and 63% female, mean age of 55 and 54 years old, and mean BMI of 34 kg/m2. Three themes were identified. One theme was practical factors, with subthemes of reasonable cost and scheduling compatibility. A second theme was anticipated effectiveness of intervention, with subthemes of intervention content addressing individual needs; social aspects influencing effectiveness; and evaluating evidence of effectiveness. A third theme was anticipated pleasantness of intervention, with subthemes of social aspects influencing enjoyment; anticipated dietary and tracking prescriptions; and identity and self-reliance factors. Different perspectives were identified from intervention initiators and non-initiators. Strategies to engage individuals in evidence-based weight loss interventions can be developed using these results. Strategies could target individuals' perceived barriers and benefits to initiating interventions, or could focus on refining interventions to appeal to more individuals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 111 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 19%
Student > Bachelor 18 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Researcher 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 37 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 24 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 16%
Psychology 8 7%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Sports and Recreations 4 4%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 41 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 17 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,775,068
of 25,397,764 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,642
of 17,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,959
of 339,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#129
of 344 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,397,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,539 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 339,487 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 344 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 62% of its contemporaries.