↓ Skip to main content

Economic analyses to support decisions about HPV vaccination in low- and middle-income countries: a consensus report and guide for analysts

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
Economic analyses to support decisions about HPV vaccination in low- and middle-income countries: a consensus report and guide for analysts
Published in
BMC Medicine, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-11-23
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Jit, Carol Levin, Marc Brisson, Ann Levin, Stephen Resch, Johannes Berkhof, Jane Kim, Raymond Hutubessy

Abstract

Low- and middle-income countries need to consider economic issues such as cost-effectiveness, affordability and sustainability before introducing a program for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. However, many such countries lack the technical capacity and data to conduct their own analyses. Analysts informing policy decisions should address the following questions: 1) Is an economic analysis needed? 2) Should analyses address costs, epidemiological outcomes, or both? 3) If costs are considered, what sort of analysis is needed? 4) If outcomes are considered, what sort of model should be used? 5) How complex should the analysis be? 6) How should uncertainty be captured? 7) How should model results be communicated? Selecting the appropriate analysis is essential to ensure that all the important features of the decision problem are correctly represented, but that the analyses are not more complex than necessary. This report describes the consensus of an expert group convened by the World Health Organization, prioritizing key issues to be addressed when considering economic analyses to support HPV vaccine introduction in these countries.

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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Netherlands 1 1%
Indonesia 1 1%
Bangladesh 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 89 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 19%
Student > Master 19 19%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 19 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 5%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 25 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 01 January 2018.
All research outputs
#6,254,025
of 22,694,633 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,374
of 3,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,243
of 282,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#69
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,694,633 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,400 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 282,145 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.