↓ Skip to main content

Positive Network Assortativity of Influenza Vaccination at a High School: Implications for Outbreak Risk and Herd Immunity

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Positive Network Assortativity of Influenza Vaccination at a High School: Implications for Outbreak Risk and Herd Immunity
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0087042
Pubmed ID
Authors

Victoria C. Barclay, Timo Smieszek, Jianping He, Guohong Cao, Jeanette J. Rainey, Hongjiang Gao, Amra Uzicanin, Marcel Salathé

Abstract

Schools are known to play a significant role in the spread of influenza. High vaccination coverage can reduce infectious disease spread within schools and the wider community through vaccine-induced immunity in vaccinated individuals and through the indirect effects afforded by herd immunity. In general, herd immunity is greatest when vaccination coverage is highest, but clusters of unvaccinated individuals can reduce herd immunity. Here, we empirically assess the extent of such clustering by measuring whether vaccinated individuals are randomly distributed or demonstrate positive assortativity across a United States high school contact network. Using computational models based on these empirical measurements, we further assess the impact of assortativity on influenza disease dynamics. We found that the contact network was positively assortative with respect to influenza vaccination: unvaccinated individuals tended to be in contact more often with other unvaccinated individuals than with vaccinated individuals, and these effects were most pronounced when we analyzed contact data collected over multiple days. Of note, unvaccinated males contributed substantially more than unvaccinated females towards the measured positive vaccination assortativity. Influenza simulation models using a positively assortative network resulted in larger average outbreak size, and outbreaks were more likely, compared to an otherwise identical network where vaccinated individuals were not clustered. These findings highlight the importance of understanding and addressing heterogeneities in seasonal influenza vaccine uptake for prevention of large, protracted school-based outbreaks of influenza, in addition to continued efforts to increase overall vaccine coverage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 101 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 23%
Student > Master 22 21%
Researcher 19 18%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 9 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 11%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 8%
Physics and Astronomy 7 7%
Other 30 28%
Unknown 16 15%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 October 2017.
All research outputs
#4,933,625
of 24,641,620 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#77,652
of 213,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,789
of 318,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,486
of 5,629 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,641,620 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 213,073 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 318,242 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,629 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.