↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of Inactivated Influenza Vaccines in Preventing Influenza-Associated Deaths and Hospitalizations among Ontario Residents Aged ≥65 Years: Estimates with Generalized Linear Models…

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
16 X users
facebook
41 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 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
Effectiveness of Inactivated Influenza Vaccines in Preventing Influenza-Associated Deaths and Hospitalizations among Ontario Residents Aged ≥65 Years: Estimates with Generalized Linear Models Accounting for Healthy Vaccinee Effects
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0076318
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin J. Ridenhour, Michael A. Campitelli, Jeffrey C. Kwong, Laura C. Rosella, Ben G. Armstrong, Punam Mangtani, Andrew J. Calzavara, David K. Shay

Abstract

Estimates of the effectiveness of influenza vaccines in older adults may be biased because of difficulties identifying and adjusting for confounders of the vaccine-outcome association. We estimated vaccine effectiveness for prevention of serious influenza complications among older persons by using methods to account for underlying differences in risk for these complications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 66 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Professor 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 11 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Mathematics 4 6%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 14 21%
Unknown 16 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 31 January 2022.
All research outputs
#1,070,498
of 25,203,135 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#13,811
of 218,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,470
of 218,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#398
of 5,144 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,203,135 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 218,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 218,170 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,144 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.