↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Vaccines for preventing typhoid fever

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
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 (84th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
wikipedia
11 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
189 Mendeley
Title
Vaccines for preventing typhoid fever
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001261.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elspeth Anwar, Elad Goldberg, Abigail Fraser, Camilo J Acosta, Mical Paul, Leonard Leibovici

Abstract

Typhoid fever and paratyphoid fever continue to be important causes of illness and death, particularly among children and adolescents in south-central and southeast Asia. Two typhoid vaccines are commercially available, Ty21a (oral) and Vi polysaccharide (parenteral), but neither is used routinely. Other vaccines, such as a new, modified, conjugated Vi vaccine called Vi-rEPA, are in development.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 189 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 184 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 39 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 15%
Student > Master 28 15%
Researcher 23 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 6%
Other 24 13%
Unknown 35 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 62 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 14 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 6%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 38 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 September 2018.
All research outputs
#4,515,057
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,702
of 11,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,660
of 319,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#140
of 224 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.9. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 319,346 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 224 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.