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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Design programmes to maximise participant engagement: a predictive study of programme and participant characteristics associated with engagement in paediatric weight management
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12966-016-0399-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James Nobles, Claire Griffiths, Andy Pringle, Paul Gately |
| Abstract |
Approximately 50 % of paediatric weight management (WM) programme attendees do not complete their respective programmes. High attrition rates compromise both programme effectiveness and cost-efficiency. Past research has examined pre-intervention participant characteristics associated with programme (non-)completion, however study samples are often small and not representative of multiple demographics. Moreover, the association between programme characteristics and participant engagement is not well known. This study examined participant and programme characteristics associated with engagement in a large, government funded, paediatric WM programme. Engagement was defined as the family's level of participation in the WM programme. Secondary data analysis of 2948 participants (Age: 10.44 ± 2.80 years, BMI: 25.99 ± 5.79 kg/m(2), Standardised BMI [BMI SDS]: 2.48 ± 0.87 units, White Ethnicity: 70.52 %) was undertaken. Participants attended a MoreLife programme (nationwide WM provider) between 2009 and 2014. Participants were classified into one of five engagement groups: Initiators, Late Dropouts, Low- or High- Sporadic Attenders, or Completers. Five binary multivariable logistic regression models were performed to identify participant (n = 11) and programmatic (n = 6) characteristics associated with an engagement group. Programme completion was classified as ≥70 % attendance. Programme characteristics were stronger predictors of programme engagement than participant characteristics; particularly small group size, winter/autumn delivery periods and earlier programme years (proxy for scalability). Conversely, participant characteristics were weak predictors of programme engagement. Predictors varied between engagement groups (e.g. Completers, Initiators, Sporadic Attenders). 47.1 % of participants completed the MoreLife programme (mean attendance: 59.4 ± 26.7 %, mean BMI SDS change: -0.15 ± 0.22 units), and 21 % of those who signed onto the programme did not attend a session. As WM services scale up, the efficacy and fidelity of programmes may be reduced due to increased demand and lower financial resource. Further, limiting WM programme groups to no more than 20 participants could result in greater engagement. Baseline participant characteristics are poor and inconsistent predictors of programme engagement. Thus, future research should evaluate participant motives, expectations, and barriers to attending a WM programme to enhance our understanding of participant WM engagement. Finally, we suggest that session-by-session attendance is recorded as a minimum requirement to improve reporting transparency and enhance external validity of study findings. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 3 | 15% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 15% |
| Ireland | 1 | 5% |
| Qatar | 1 | 5% |
| Denmark | 1 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 35% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 35% |
| Scientists | 6 | 30% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 120 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 18% |
| Unknown | 30 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 10% |
| Psychology | 11 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 16% |
| Unknown | 34 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 04 September 2018.
All research outputs
#1,753,799
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#643
of 2,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,013
of 370,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#15
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,042 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 370,492 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 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.