↓ Skip to main content

Modeling the impact of the difference in cross-protection data between a human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine and a human papillomavirus (HPV)-6/11/16/18 vaccine in Canada

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 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
Modeling the impact of the difference in cross-protection data between a human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine and a human papillomavirus (HPV)-6/11/16/18 vaccine in Canada
Published in
BMC Public Health, October 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-872
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michele Kohli, Donna Lawrence, Jennifer Haig, Andrea Anonychuk, Nadia Demarteau

Abstract

In Canada, two vaccines that have demonstrated high efficacy against infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) types -16 and -18 are available. The HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine provides protection against genital warts (GW) while the HPV-16/18 vaccine may provide better protection against other oncogenic HPV types. In this analysis, the estimated clinical and economic benefit of each of these vaccines was compared in the Canadian setting.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
United States 1 1%
Denmark 1 1%
Mauritius 1 1%
Unknown 82 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 20 23%
Unknown 9 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 11%
Social Sciences 8 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 14 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 October 2012.
All research outputs
#9,905,608
of 12,372,633 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,256
of 8,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,798
of 129,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#81
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,633 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,418 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 129,932 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.