↓ Skip to main content

Human papillomavirus vaccine introduction in low-income and middle-income countries: guidance on the use of cost-effectiveness models

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, May 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 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
Human papillomavirus vaccine introduction in low-income and middle-income countries: guidance on the use of cost-effectiveness models
Published in
BMC Medicine, May 2011
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-9-54
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Jit, Nadia Demarteau, Elamin Elbasha, Gary Ginsberg, Jane Kim, Naiyana Praditsitthikorn, Edina Sinanovic, Raymond Hutubessy

Abstract

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that the cost effectiveness of introducing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is considered before such a strategy is implemented. However, developing countries often lack the technical capacity to perform and interpret results of economic appraisals of vaccines. To provide information about the feasibility of using such models in a developing country setting, we evaluated models of HPV vaccination in terms of their capacity, requirements, limitations and comparability.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 118 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 23%
Researcher 25 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Other 9 7%
Other 21 17%
Unknown 18 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 30%
Social Sciences 14 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 12 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 25 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,499,193
of 17,351,915 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,106
of 2,703 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,167
of 142,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,351,915 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,703 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 142,715 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them