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 |
A cost comparison of electronic and hybrid data collection systems in Ontario during pandemic and seasonal influenza vaccination campaigns
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-11-210 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer A Pereira, Julie Foisy, Jeffrey C Kwong, Christine L Heidebrecht, Susan Quach, Sherman D Quan, Maryse Guay, Beate Sander, the Public Health Agency of Canada/Canadian Institutes of Health Research Influenza Research Network (PCIRN) Vaccine Coverage Theme Group |
| Abstract |
During the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza vaccination campaign, health regions in Canada collected client-level immunization data using fully electronic or hybrid systems, with the latter comprising both electronic and paper-based elements. The objective of our evaluation was to compare projected five-year costs associated with implementing these systems in Ontario public health units (PHUs) during pandemic and seasonal influenza vaccination campaigns. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 30% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 13 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 17% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 21% |
| Unknown | 20 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 September 2011.
All research outputs
#18,295,723
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,422
of 7,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,012
of 124,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#68
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 124,990 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.