↓ Skip to main content

Promoting fit bodies, healthy eating and physical activity among Indigenous Australian men: a study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, January 2012
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
12 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 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 fit bodies, healthy eating and physical activity among Indigenous Australian men: a study protocol
Published in
BMC Public Health, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-28
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lina A Ricciardelli, David Mellor, Marita P McCabe, Alexander J Mussap, David J Hallford, Matthew Tyler

Abstract

Overall the physical health of Indigenous men is among the worst in Australia. Research has indicated that modifiable lifestyle factors, such as poor nutrition and physical inactivity, appear to contribute strongly to these poor health conditions. To effectively develop and implement strategies to improve the health of Australia's Indigenous peoples, a greater understanding is needed of how Indigenous men perceive health, and how they view and care for their bodies. Further, a more systematic understanding of how sociocultural factors affect their health attitudes and behaviours is needed. This article presents the study protocol of a community-based investigation into the factors surrounding the health and body image of Indigenous Australian men.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Australia 2 2%
Romania 1 <1%
Unknown 127 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 31 23%
Student > Master 17 13%
Researcher 16 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 23 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 23%
Psychology 16 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 11%
Social Sciences 12 9%
Sports and Recreations 9 7%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 34 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 22 August 2013.
All research outputs
#1,686,893
of 16,918,232 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,987
of 11,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,420
of 224,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#88
of 670 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,918,232 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,481 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 224,474 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 670 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.