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 |
An analysis of national target groups for monovalent 2009 pandemic influenza vaccine and trivalent seasonal influenza vaccines in 2009-10 and 2010-11
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2334-11-230 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sophia Ng, Peng Wu, Hiroshi Nishiura, Dennis KM Ip, Esther ST Lee, Benjamin J Cowling |
| Abstract |
Vaccination is generally considered to be the best primary prevention measure against influenza virus infection. Many countries encourage specific target groups of people to undertake vaccination, often with financial subsidies or a priority list. To understand differential patterns of national target groups for influenza vaccination before, during and after the 2009 influenza pandemic, we reviewed and analyzed the country-specific policies in the corresponding time periods. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 States | 2 | 50% |
| India | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Taiwan | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 84 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 22% |
| Researcher | 18 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 17 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 28% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 22 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 August 2014.
All research outputs
#14,136,253
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#3,736
of 7,626 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,152
of 124,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#34
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,626 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 124,037 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 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 52% of its contemporaries.