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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Pneumococcal conjugate vaccines for preventing vaccine‐type invasive pneumococcal disease and X‐ray defined pneumonia in children less than two years of age
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004977.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marilla G Lucero, Vernoni E Dulalia, Leilani T Nillos, Gail Williams, Rhea Angela N Parreño, Hanna Nohynek, Ian D Riley, Helena Makela |
| Abstract |
Pneumonia, caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among children in low-income countries. The effectiveness of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) against invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), pneumonia, and mortality needs to be evaluated. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 320 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Kenya | 1 | <1% |
| Malawi | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 311 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 54 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 47 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 38 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 22 | 7% |
| Other | 49 | 15% |
| Unknown | 78 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 126 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 3% |
| Other | 44 | 14% |
| Unknown | 94 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 04 June 2024.
All research outputs
#1,267,046
of 26,266,588 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,496
of 13,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,435
of 109,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,266,588 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,202 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 109,743 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.