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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Evaluation of Hepatitis A Vaccine in Post-Exposure Prophylaxis, The Netherlands, 2004-2012
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0078914 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jane Whelan, Gerard J. Sonder, Lian Bovée, Arjen Speksnijder, Anneke van den Hoek |
| Abstract |
The secondary attack rate of hepatitis A virus (HAV) among contacts of cases is up to 50%. Historically, contacts were offered immunoglobulin (IG, a human derived blood product) as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Amid safety concerns about IG, HAV vaccine is increasingly recommended instead. Public health authorities' recommendations differ, particularly for healthy contacts ≥40 years old, where vaccine efficacy data is limited. We evaluated routine use of HAV vaccine as an alternative to immunoglobulin in PEP, in those considered at low risk of severe infection in the Netherlands. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Colombia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 18% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 27% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 18% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 9% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 15 November 2013.
All research outputs
#14,636,949
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#122,415
of 193,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,442
of 211,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,064
of 5,139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,986 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 211,883 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,139 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.