↓ Skip to main content

"Healthy Eating - Healthy Action": evaluating New Zealand's obesity prevention strategy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, December 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
"Healthy Eating - Healthy Action": evaluating New Zealand's obesity prevention strategy
Published in
BMC Public Health, December 2009
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-9-452
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachael M McLean, Janet A Hoek, Sue Buckley, Bronwyn Croxson, Jacqueline Cumming, Terry H Ehau, Ausaga Fa'asalele Tanuvasa, Margaret Johnston, Jim I Mann, Grant Schofield

Abstract

New Zealand rates of obesity and overweight have increased since the 1980s, particularly among indigenous Māori people, Pacific people and those living in areas of high deprivation. New Zealand's response to the obesity epidemic has been The Healthy Eating-Healthy Action: Oranga Kai - Oranga Pumau (HEHA) Strategy ('the Strategy'), launched in 2003. Because the HEHA Strategy explicitly recognises the importance of evaluation and the need to create an evidence base to support future initiatives, the Ministry of Health has commissioned a Consortium of researchers to evaluate the Strategy as a whole. This paper discusses the Consortium's approach to evaluating the HEHA Strategy. It includes an outline of the conceptual framework underpinning the evaluation, and describes the critical components of the evaluation which are: judging to what extent stakeholders were engaged in the process of the strategy implementation and to what extent their feedback was incorporated in to future iterations of the Strategy (continuous improvement), to what extent the programmes, policies, and initiatives implemented span the target populations and priority areas, whether there have been any population changes in nutrition and/or physical activity outcomes or behaviours relating to those outcomes, and to what extent HEHA Strategy and spending can be considered value for money. This paper outlines our approach to evaluating a complex national health promotion strategy. Not only does the Evaluation have the potential to identify interventions that could be adopted internationally, but also the development of the Evaluation design can inform other complex evaluations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
New Zealand 2 2%
Canada 2 2%
Unknown 95 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 23%
Researcher 21 21%
Student > Master 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 11 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 18%
Social Sciences 17 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 16 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 January 2023.
All research outputs
#6,912,452
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,265
of 14,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,482
of 164,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#29
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,746 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 164,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 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 57% of its contemporaries.