↓ Skip to main content

Elucidating the impact of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine programme on pneumonia, sepsis and otitis media hospital admissions in England using a composite control

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
78 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Elucidating the impact of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine programme on pneumonia, sepsis and otitis media hospital admissions in England using a composite control
Published in
BMC Medicine, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12916-018-1004-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dominic Thorrington, Nick Andrews, Julia Stowe, Elizabeth Miller, Albert Jan van Hoek

Abstract

The seven-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) was introduced in England in September 2006, changing to the 13-valent vaccine in April 2010. PCV impact on invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) has been extensively reported, but less described is its impact on the burden of pneumonia, sepsis and otitis media in the hospital. Using details on all admissions to hospitals in England, we compared the incidence of pneumococcal-specific and syndromic disease endpoints in a 24-month pre-PCV period beginning April 2004 to the 24-month period ending March 2015 to derive incidence rate ratios (IRRs). To adjust for possible secular trends in admission practice, IRRs were compared to the IRRs for five control conditions over the same period and the relative change assessed using the geometric mean of the five control IRRs as a composite, and individually for each control condition to give the min-max range. Relative changes were also compared with IRRs for IPD from the national laboratory database. The effect of stratifying cases into those with and without clinical risk factors for pneumococcal infection was explored. Relative reductions in pneumococcal pneumonia were seen in all age groups and in those with and without risk factors; in children under 15 years old reductions were similar in magnitude to reductions in IPD. For pneumonia of unspecified cause, relative reductions were seen in those under 15 years old (maximum reduction in children under 2 years of 34%, min-max: 11-49%) with a relative increase in 65+ year olds most marked in those with underlying risk conditions (41%, min-max: 0-82%). Reductions in pneumococcal sepsis were seen in all age groups, with the largest reduction in children younger than 2 years (67%, min-max 56-75%). Reductions in empyema and lung abscess were also seen in under 15 year olds. Results for other disease endpoints were varied. For disease endpoints showing an increase in raw IRR, the increase was generally reduced when expressed as a relative change. Use of a composite control and stratification by risk group status can help elucidate the impact of PCV on non-IPD disease endpoints and in vulnerable population groups. We estimate a substantial reduction in the hospitalised burden of pneumococcal pneumonia in all age groups and pneumonia of unspecified cause, empyema and lung abscess in children under 15 years of age since PCV introduction. The increase in unspecified pneumonia in high-risk 65+ year olds may in part reflect their greater susceptibility to develop pneumonia from less pathogenic serotypes that are replacing vaccine types in the nasopharynx.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 25 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 39%
Mathematics 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 29 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 13 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,442,185
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,426
of 3,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,530
of 439,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#39
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,455 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 439,449 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.