↓ Skip to main content

Examining the interaction of fast-food outlet exposure and income on diet and obesity: evidence from 51,361 UK Biobank participants

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
140 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
109 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
261 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
Examining the interaction of fast-food outlet exposure and income on diet and obesity: evidence from 51,361 UK Biobank participants
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12966-018-0699-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Burgoine, Chinmoy Sarkar, Chris J. Webster, Pablo Monsivais

Abstract

Household income (as a marker of socioeconomic position) and neighbourhood fast-food outlet exposure may be related to diet and body weight, which are key risk factors for non-communicable diseases. However, the research evidence is equivocal. Moreover, understanding the double burden of these factors is a matter of public health importance. The purpose of this study was to test associations of neighbourhood fast-food outlet exposure and household income, in relation to frequency of consumption of processed meat and multiple measures of adiposity, and to examine possible interactions. We employed an observational, cross-sectional study design. In a cohort of 51,361 adults aged 38-72 years in Greater London, UK, we jointly classified participants based on household income (£/year, four groups) and GIS-derived neighbourhood fast-food outlet proportion (counts of fast-food outlets as a percentage of all food outlets, quartiles). Multivariable regression models estimated main effects and interactions (additive and multiplicative) of household income and fast-food outlet proportion on odds of self-reported frequent processed meat consumption (> 1/week), measured BMI (kg/m2), body fat (%), and odds of obesity (BMI ≥ 30). Income and fast-food proportion were independently, systematically associated with BMI, body fat, obesity and frequent processed meat consumption. Odds of obesity were greater for lowest income participants compared to highest (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.41, 1.69) and for those most-exposed to fast-food outlets compared to least-exposed (OR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.40, 1.64). In jointly classified models, lowest income and highest fast-food outlet proportion in combination were associated with greater odds of obesity (OR = 2.43, 95% CI: 2.09, 2.84), with relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI = 0.03). Results were similar for frequent processed meat consumption models. There was no evidence of interaction on a multiplicative scale between fast-food outlet proportion and household income on each of BMI (P = 0.230), obesity (P = 0.054) and frequent processed meat consumption (P = 0.725). Our study demonstrated independent associations of neighbourhood fast-food outlet exposure and household income, in relation to diet and multiple objective measures of adiposity, in a large sample of UK adults. Moreover, we provide evidence of the double burden of low income and an unhealthy neighbourhood food environment, furthering our understanding of how these factors contribute jointly to social inequalities in health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 140 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 261 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 261 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 14%
Student > Bachelor 36 14%
Researcher 26 10%
Student > Master 25 10%
Student > Postgraduate 12 5%
Other 31 12%
Unknown 95 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 34 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 11%
Social Sciences 20 8%
Psychology 13 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 3%
Other 42 16%
Unknown 115 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 96. 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 06 March 2023.
All research outputs
#446,801
of 25,959,914 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#124
of 2,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,499
of 344,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#1
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,959,914 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,142 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 344,230 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 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.