| Title |
Frequency and impact of confounding by indication and healthy vaccinee bias in observational studies assessing influenza vaccine effectiveness: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Infectious Diseases, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12879-015-1154-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cornelius Remschmidt, Ole Wichmann, Thomas Harder |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 70 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 6% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 3% |
| Thailand | 1 | 1% |
| Austria | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| Chile | 1 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 47 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 63 | 90% |
| Scientists | 4 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 113 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 26 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 19% |
| Unknown | 19 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Psychology | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 13% |
| Unknown | 29 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 70. 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 06 March 2024.
All research outputs
#621,185
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#149
of 8,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,160
of 299,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,702 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 299,246 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 164 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 99% of its contemporaries.