↓ Skip to main content

Pertussis and Rotavirus Vaccines – Controversies and Solutions

Overview of attention for article published in Indian Journal of Pediatrics, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Pertussis and Rotavirus Vaccines – Controversies and Solutions
Published in
Indian Journal of Pediatrics, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12098-017-2393-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nabaneeta Dash, Sanjay Verma

Abstract

Pertussis and rotavirus vaccines have been the subject of several controversies over the years. In this paper the authors discuss facts and myths behind these controversies and also suggest solutions to overcome some limitations of these vaccines. The whole-cell pertussis vaccine (wPV) came into disrepute due to the associated adverse reactions, resulting in its replacement by acellular pertussis vaccine (aPV) in industrialized nations in 1990s. Although wPV is known to have more side effects; but they are usually minor. Whole-cell pertussis containing vaccine is being used safely in the National Immunization programme in India from many years. Another controversy erupted during 2009-2010, when there were reports of resurgence of pertussis cases among adolescents and adults, from developed nations. Present literature review raises doubts about long term protection offered by aPV, when compared with wPV. In spite of prevailing controversy, acellular pertussis containing vaccines should be acceptable, if timely delivery of primary and booster doses is ensured; including vaccination of adolescents and pregnant women. Initial rotavirus vaccine was withdrawn from the market because of increased risk of intussusception. Although three new generation rotavirus vaccines are currently available for use in India, but doubts about their efficacy, long term protection and safety still exists. Present literature review found them to be safe and moderately efficacious because of reasonable good cross protection. Even a moderately efficacious vaccine like rotavirus vaccine could significantly improve the outcome if disease burden is high. Therefore, it is being included in National Immunization Programme of India.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 22%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 13 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 27 November 2018.
All research outputs
#7,034,523
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Indian Journal of Pediatrics
#260
of 1,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,138
of 291,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Indian Journal of Pediatrics
#2
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,553 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 291,516 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.