↓ Skip to main content

The Effectiveness of Brief Information and Self-Efficacy-Based Interventions in Influencing Snack Choices in Homeless Individuals

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
The Effectiveness of Brief Information and Self-Efficacy-Based Interventions in Influencing Snack Choices in Homeless Individuals
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00293
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chris Emmerson, Bev John, Susan Faulkner, Deborah Lancastle, Gareth Roderique-Davies

Abstract

Homeless adults frequently experience poor nutrition. Research suggests raising self-efficacy and nutritional knowledge can increase healthy eating but that the choice of specific behavioral change techniques (BCTs) is also critical. This study investigated how BCTs, operationalized to increase nutrition knowledge and self-efficacy, might influence the choice of homeless adults when presented with a "healthy" and an "unhealthy" snack. A total of 125 homeless adults were randomly allocated to watch 1 of 4 brief films: "control," "[nutrition] information only," "self-efficacy" (aimed at increasing self-efficacy and general healthy eating knowledge), and "enhanced self-efficacy" (as "self-efficacy," but the presenter identified themselves as a homeless adult). Post-film, participants were invited to choose between a healthy and an unhealthy snack. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and chi square. Participants in the "enhanced self-efficacy" condition were significantly more likely to choose the healthy option compared to those in the control condition; for the "self-efficacy" condition, the difference was marginally significant. Perceived knowledge and self-efficacy were significantly associated and those with high self-efficacy were significantly more likely to choose a healthy snack regardless of condition. Homeless adults are more likely to make healthy snack choices if their nutritional self-efficacy is increased through encouragement by a peer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 27%
Professor 1 7%
Unspecified 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 3 20%
Psychology 2 13%
Environmental Science 1 7%
Unspecified 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 6 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 January 2018.
All research outputs
#15,482,347
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#4,646
of 10,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,169
of 330,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#68
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,237 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 330,777 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.