↓ Skip to main content

Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants [shortened version] scores are associated with Healthy Eating Index-2010 scores and other indices of diet quality in healthy adult omnivores and vegetarians

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, September 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 (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 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
Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants [shortened version] scores are associated with Healthy Eating Index-2010 scores and other indices of diet quality in healthy adult omnivores and vegetarians
Published in
Nutrition Journal, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12937-018-0399-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carol S Johnston, Courtney Bliss, Jessica R Knurick, Cameron Scholtz

Abstract

The Healthy Eating Index-2010 is a measure of diet quality as portrayed by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans; however, computing the Healthy Eating Index score is time consuming and requires trained personnel. The Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants [shortened version] is a simple measure that quickly, in less than 10 min, assesses diet quality in a clinical or research setting. This research evaluated the degree of correlation between these two methods of scoring diet quality, as well as between these methods and other indicators of diet quality, including the nutrient density of the diet, the dietary potential renal acid load, urine pH, and plasma vitamin C concentrations. The research design was a secondary data analysis, and participants were healthy adults (n = 81) self-classified as omnivorous, vegetarian, or vegan. Confounding variables were identified and controlled using partial correlations. The two methods of scoring diet quality were significantly correlated (r = 0.227, p = 0.047). Both the Healthy Eating Index and the Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants scoring methods were correlated to nutrient density of the diets (r = 0.474 and r = 0.472 respectively, p < 0.001) as well as to the dietary potential renal acid load and urinary pH (r ranging from 0.304-0.341, p ≤ 0.002). The Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants, but not the Healthy Eating Index, was significantly correlated to plasma vitamin C concentrations (r = 0.500, p < 0.001 and 0.192, p = 0.095 respectively). These results in combination with ease of use and low cost suggest that the Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants measure is a useful tool for assessing diet quality.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 34 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 15%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Sports and Recreations 3 3%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 34 39%

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 10 August 2020.
All research outputs
#2,434,670
of 18,639,770 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#530
of 1,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,646
of 287,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,639,770 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,333 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 287,178 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them