↓ Skip to main content

Safety and reactogenicity of primary vaccination with the 10-valent pneumococcal non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae protein D conjugate vaccine in Vietnamese infants: a randomised, controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 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
Safety and reactogenicity of primary vaccination with the 10-valent pneumococcal non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae protein D conjugate vaccine in Vietnamese infants: a randomised, controlled trial
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-13-95
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tran Ngoc Huu, Nguyen Trong Toan, Ha Manh Tuan, Ho Lu Viet, Pham Le Thanh Binh, Ta-Wen Yu, Fakrudeen Shafi, Ahsan Habib, Dorota Borys

Abstract

Pneumococcal infections are major causes of child mortality and morbidity worldwide and antibiotic resistance of Streptococcus pneumoniae is a major concern, especially in Asian countries. The present study was designed to evaluate the reactogenicity and safety of the 10-valent pneumococcal non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae protein D conjugate vaccine (PHiD-CV) when co-administered with the licensed diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, hepatitis B virus, inactivated poliovirus and H. influenzae type b vaccine (DTPa-HBV-IPV/Hib) in a 3-dose primary vaccination course in Vietnamese infants.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Peru 1 1%
Unknown 93 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 16%
Student > Master 15 16%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 5 5%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 26 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 38%
Psychology 5 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 33 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 January 2014.
All research outputs
#13,030,656
of 22,696,971 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#3,096
of 7,644 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,693
of 192,992 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#55
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,696,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,644 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 192,992 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.