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 |
Why parents refuse childhood vaccination: a qualitative study using online focus groups
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1183 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Irene A Harmsen, Liesbeth Mollema, Robert AC Ruiter, Theo GW Paulussen, Hester E de Melker, Gerjo Kok |
| Abstract |
In high income countries, vaccine-preventable diseases have been greatly reduced through routine vaccination programs. Despite this success, many parents question, and a small proportion even refuse vaccination for their children. As no qualitative studies have explored the factors behind these decisions among Dutch parents, we performed a study using online focus groups. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 33% |
| United States | 2 | 13% |
| Austria | 1 | 7% |
| Italy | 1 | 7% |
| Angola | 1 | 7% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 80% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 448 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 442 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 95 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 77 | 17% |
| Researcher | 38 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 25 | 6% |
| Other | 70 | 16% |
| Unknown | 110 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 103 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 69 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 42 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 21 | 5% |
| Psychology | 20 | 4% |
| Other | 70 | 16% |
| Unknown | 123 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 23 January 2021.
All research outputs
#2,818,828
of 25,564,614 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,479
of 17,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,252
of 322,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#60
of 264 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,564,614 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,697 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 322,056 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 264 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.