↓ Skip to main content

Influenza vaccine effectiveness and confounding factors among young children

Overview of attention for article published in Vaccine, June 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
57 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Influenza vaccine effectiveness and confounding factors among young children
Published in
Vaccine, June 2008
DOI 10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.06.034
Pubmed ID
Authors

Megumi Fujieda, Akiko Maeda, Kyoko Kondo, Wakaba Fukushima, Satoko Ohfuji, Masaro Kaji, Yoshio Hirota

Abstract

This study, done during the 2002--2003 season among children <6 years of age to investigate influenza vaccine effectiveness and confounding factors, involved 2913 children (1512 vaccinees, 1401 non-vaccinees) recruited from 54 paediatric clinics. Between December 2002 and April 2003, parents reported their children's maximum body temperatures weekly. Influenza-like illness (ILI) was defined as an acute febrile illness (> or =38.0 degrees C) during the peak epidemic period. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for ILI were obtained using a logistic regression model. In analysis for total subjects, the ORs were significantly decreased for vaccinees (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.66-0.88) and significantly increased for younger age groups, including children aged 2.0-3.9 years (1.42, 1.18-1.72) and those < 2.0 years (2.02,1.61-2.54), compared to those between 4.0 and 5.9 years. ORs were significantly increased for children who visited a physician within the last 6 months for a cold (1.27, 1.08-1.50), attended preschool (1.72, 1.45-2.04), and had > or =3 siblings (1.42, 1.15-1.74). These confounding factors are suggested to be considered in estimating vaccine effectiveness among young children. In subgroup analysis by age groups, significantly decreased ORs were seen in 2.0-3.9-year-old (0.59, 0.47-0.74) and 4.0-5.9-year-old (0.75, 0.58-0.98) vaccinees; no significant vaccine effectiveness was detected for those < 2.0 years (1.07, 0.80-1.44). Thus, among very young children vaccine effectiveness could not be demonstrated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 57 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 19%
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 16%
Student > Master 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 6 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 6 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 25 January 2016.
All research outputs
#895,042
of 25,599,531 outputs
Outputs from Vaccine
#776
of 16,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,808
of 96,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vaccine
#6
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,599,531 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,577 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 96,451 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 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 96% of its contemporaries.