↓ Skip to main content

Cost effectiveness of pediatric pneumococcal conjugate vaccines: a comparative assessment of decision-making tools

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, May 2011
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 (81st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Cost effectiveness of pediatric pneumococcal conjugate vaccines: a comparative assessment of decision-making tools
Published in
BMC Medicine, May 2011
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-9-53
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk, Ratchadaporn Somkrua, Raymond Hutubessy, Ana Maria Henao, Joachim Hombach, Alessia Melegaro, John W Edmunds, Philippe Beutels

Abstract

Several decision support tools have been developed to aid policymaking regarding the adoption of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) into national pediatric immunization programs. The lack of critical appraisal of these tools makes it difficult for decision makers to understand and choose between them. With the aim to guide policymakers on their optimal use, we compared publicly available decision-making tools in relation to their methods, influential parameters and results.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 71 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 30%
Student > Master 13 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 5 7%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 6 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 41%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 10 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 May 2011.
All research outputs
#2,179,790
of 12,517,134 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,265
of 2,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,490
of 144,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#20
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,517,134 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 2,010 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.9. 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 144,514 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.