↓ Skip to main content

Vaccines for preventing typhoid fever

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
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 (85th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters
wikipedia
11 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
90 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
184 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
Vaccines for preventing typhoid fever
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001261.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elspeth Anwar, Elad Goldberg, Abigail Fraser, Camilo J Acosta, Mical Paul, Leonard Leibovici

Abstract

Typhoid fever and paratyphoid fever continue to be important causes of illness and death, particularly among children and adolescents in south-central and southeast Asia. Two typhoid vaccines are commercially available, Ty21a (oral) and Vi polysaccharide (parenteral), but neither is used routinely. Other vaccines, such as a new, modified, conjugated Vi vaccine called Vi-rEPA, are in development.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters 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 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 179 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 39 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 15%
Student > Master 27 15%
Researcher 23 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 26 14%
Unknown 30 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 62 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 14 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 6%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 34 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 20 September 2018.
All research outputs
#3,287,591
of 21,358,901 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,795
of 12,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,292
of 304,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#85
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,358,901 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 304,867 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.