↓ Skip to main content

Long-term Comparative Immunogenicity of Protein Conjugate and Free Polysaccharide Pneumococcal Vaccines in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Infectious Diseases, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
Long-term Comparative Immunogenicity of Protein Conjugate and Free Polysaccharide Pneumococcal Vaccines in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Published in
Clinical Infectious Diseases, May 2012
DOI 10.1093/cid/cis513
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark T. Dransfield, Sarah Harnden, Robert L. Burton, Richard K. Albert, William C. Bailey, Richard Casaburi, John Connett, J. Allen D. Cooper, Gerard J. Criner, Jeffrey L. Curtis, MeiLan K. Han, Barry Make, Nathaniel Marchetti, Fernando J. Martinez, Charlene McEvoy, Moon H. Nahm, Dennis E. Niewoehner, Janos Porszasz, John Reilly, Paul D. Scanlon, Steven M. Scharf, Frank C. Sciurba, George R. Washko, Prescott G. Woodruff, Stephen C. Lazarus

Abstract

Although the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) protects against invasive disease in young healthy persons, randomized controlled trials in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have demonstrated no benefit in the intention-to-treat population. We previously reported that the 7-valent diphtheria-conjugated pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PCV7) is safe and induced greater serotype-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) and functional antibody than did PPSV23 1 month after vaccination. We hypothesized that these advantages would persist at 1 and 2 years.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Kenya 1 1%
Unknown 66 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Researcher 9 13%
Other 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 16 24%
Unknown 17 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Computer Science 3 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Mathematics 1 1%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 23 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 12 August 2022.
All research outputs
#4,079,326
of 23,072,295 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Infectious Diseases
#5,684
of 15,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,061
of 166,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Infectious Diseases
#47
of 159 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,072,295 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,843 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 166,058 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 159 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 70% of its contemporaries.