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 |
Comparative review of three cost-effectiveness models for rotavirus vaccines in national immunization programs; a generic approach applied to various regions in the world
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, July 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-9-84 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maarten J Postma, Mark Jit, Mark H Rozenbaum, Baudouin Standaert, Hong-Anh Tu, Raymond CW Hutubessy |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| Bangladesh | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 76 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 22% |
| Unknown | 10 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 38% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 11 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Unknown | 11 | 14% |
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 17 October 2019.
All research outputs
#7,634,980
of 23,924,386 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,691
of 3,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,381
of 118,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#21
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,924,386 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,616 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.6. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 118,400 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.