| Title |
Health, not weight loss, focused programmes versus conventional weight loss programmes for cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, August 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-019-1083-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nazanin Khasteganan, Deborah Lycett, Gill Furze, Andy P. Turner |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | 43% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 19% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Zimbabwe | 1 | 5% |
| Chile | 1 | 5% |
| Ireland | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 52% |
| Scientists | 8 | 38% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 126 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 13% |
| Researcher | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 11% |
| Unknown | 45 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 15% |
| Psychology | 18 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Unknown | 51 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 16 February 2023.
All research outputs
#2,168,600
of 25,432,721 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#347
of 2,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,107
of 356,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#10
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,432,721 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,234 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 356,313 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.