↓ Skip to main content

Preventing Pneumococcal Disease in the Elderly

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs & Aging, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
Preventing Pneumococcal Disease in the Elderly
Published in
Drugs & Aging, February 2013
DOI 10.1007/s40266-013-0060-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angel Vila-Corcoles, Olga Ochoa-Gondar

Abstract

Streptococcus pneumoniae remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world. To date, after the introduction of routine childhood immunization, elderly people (i.e., persons aged 65 years or older) suffer the greatest burden of pneumococcal disease in developed countries. At present, two anti-pneumococcal vaccines are available for use in adults: the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) and the 13-valent protein-polysaccharide conjugate vaccine (PCV13). This article reviews current data about the burden of pneumococcal disease in the elderly, as well as evidence for immunogenicity, clinical efficacy, and possible cost-effectiveness of both vaccines. The main advantage of PCV13 is that it may be more effective than PPV23, but a major limitation is that it is directed against strains that are likely to be greatly reduced in the population since its introduction in childhood immunization. The main disadvantage of PPV23 is that it may be less effective than PCV13 against vaccine-type infections but a major advantage is that it may provide protection against ten additional serotypes. To date, expert committees have not changed recommendations for pneumococcal vaccination in adults. However, at present, they are evaluating different alternatives (basically, maintaining PPV23, changing from PPV23 to PCV13 in some groups, or adding PCV13 for all or some target adult population subgroups). Critical data (clinical efficacy reported in ongoing trials and magnitude of indirect effects of pediatric PCV13 programs) needed to make a well-informed decision could be available during 2013. Considering all concerns over indirect effects and replacement strains following the use of polysaccharide-based vaccines, efforts should be directed toward developing vaccines, such as protein-based pneumococcal vaccines, with potential serotype-independent protection. Meanwhile, according to current recommendations, PPV23 should continue to be used for high-risk adults and all elderly people (with and without additional high-risk conditions). Although it is only moderately effective, it has a considerable serotype coverage and at-risk persons can benefit from the vaccination. High-risk individuals could also obtain a benefit from adding PCV13, but more data are needed before a universal recommendation can be made.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 66 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Master 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 22 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 February 2016.
All research outputs
#5,698,981
of 22,723,682 outputs
Outputs from Drugs & Aging
#385
of 1,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,983
of 193,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs & Aging
#6
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,723,682 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,193 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 193,045 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 72% of its contemporaries.