↓ Skip to main content

Is adolescent pertussis vaccination preferable to natural booster infections?

Overview of attention for article published in Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Is adolescent pertussis vaccination preferable to natural booster infections?
Published in
Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology, January 2014
DOI 10.1586/ecp.11.55
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hans O Hallander, Lennart Nilsson, Lennart Gustafsson

Abstract

Pertussis is still poorly controlled in both adolescents and adults. As a result, an adolescent pertussis booster vaccine dose has already been implemented or decided on in many countries. The reasons for this have been twofold: a worrying increase of infections in the target group of adolescents and a wish to prevent serious pertussis disease among young yet unvaccinated, and partly vaccinated, infants. Currently, it is still too early to evaluate the effect of the late booster on the circulation of Bordetella pertussis owing to the lack of relevant follow-up data. A universal adolescent booster vaccination will reduce the incidence of pertussis in the target group but the duration of immunity is uncertain. It is an open question as to what extent boosters should be offered to older age groups or if natural infections would be preferable. On the one hand, circulating B. pertussis may be hazardous to the youngest unvaccinated infants. On the other hand, subclinical natural boosters might be beneficial to population immunity. As the duration of immunity is shorter after vaccination than after natural infections, an unwanted consequence of adolescent boosters might shift the infection peak to older child-bearing adults. It is therefore recommended that recurrent serosurveys are used to follow the influence of vaccination on the antigenic pressure, as well as the duration of protective immunity. For this purpose, standardization of symptoms and laboratory criteria used for notification, as well as the methodology for seroepidemiology, must be established. Adverse reactions after adolescent vaccination and outbreaks owing to new B. pertussis variants must also be carefully monitored. In this article, we have used Swedish surveillance data and the results from Swedish seroepidemiology to illustrate these problem areas.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
France 1 4%
Australia 1 4%
Unknown 22 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 20%
Researcher 4 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 4 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 12%
Psychology 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 11 44%
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 11 November 2022.
All research outputs
#7,055,024
of 23,081,466 outputs
Outputs from Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology
#238
of 841 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,791
of 306,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology
#42
of 135 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,081,466 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 841 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 306,532 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 135 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.