↓ Skip to main content

Determinants of seasonal influenza vaccination in pregnant women in Valencia, Spain

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 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
Determinants of seasonal influenza vaccination in pregnant women in Valencia, Spain
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3823-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

R. Vila-Candel, P. Navarro-Illana, E. Navarro-Illana, E. Castro-Sánchez, Kiri Duke, F. J. Soriano-Vidal, J. Tuells, J. Díez-Domingo

Abstract

In most countries the coverage of seasonal influenza vaccination in pregnant women is low. We investigated the acceptance, reasons for rejection and professional involvement related to vaccine information in pregnant women in Valencia, Spain. Observational retrospective study in 200 pregnant women, 100 vaccinated and 100 unvaccinated, were interviewed during the 2014/2015 vaccination campaign. Electronic medical records, immunization registry and telephone interviews were used to determine reasons for vaccination and immunization rejection. 40.5% of pregnant women in the health department were vaccinated. The midwife was identified as source of information for 89% of women. The vaccine was rejected due to low perceptions of risk of influenza infection (23%), lack of information (19%), considering the vaccine as superfluous (16%), close proximity of delivery date (13%) and fear of side effects (12%). Pregnant women in Spain declined to be vaccinated due to under-estimation of the risk of contracting or being harmed by influenza, and lack of information. Interventions aiming to optimize vaccination coverage should include information addressing the safety and effectiveness of the current vaccine together with improved professional training and motivation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 121 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 12%
Student > Bachelor 14 11%
Researcher 11 9%
Other 7 6%
Other 25 20%
Unknown 33 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 12%
Unspecified 6 5%
Psychology 6 5%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 43 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 June 2020.
All research outputs
#5,827,517
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,738
of 15,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,411
of 419,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#65
of 171 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 419,969 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 171 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 61% of its contemporaries.