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 |
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. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Mauritius | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 97 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 27% |
| Researcher | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 21% |
| Unknown | 17 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 18% |
| Unknown | 22 | 22% |
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
#18,317,537
of 22,681,577 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12,765
of 14,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,477
of 173,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#269
of 313 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,681,577 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 14,762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. 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 173,661 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 313 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.