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 |
The burden of pertussis in low- and middle-income countries since the inception of the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) in 1974: a systematic review protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-015-0053-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rudzani Muloiwa, Benjamin M Kagina, Mark E Engel, Gregory D Hussey |
| Abstract |
Vaccine against pertussis has been in use for several decades. Despite the widespread use of pertussis vaccine, evidence shows resurgence of pertussis in high-income countries. Pertussis surveillance data is largely missing from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Without data on trends of pertussis, it is difficult to review and amend pertussis control policies in any country. We propose conducting a systematic review to evaluate the burden and trends of pertussis in LMICs since 1974. Common and medical subject heading (MeSH) terms for pertussis and LMICs will be used to search electronic databases for the relevant literature published between 1974 and December 2014. Only studies from LMICs that fulfils World Health Organisation (WHO) or CDC pertussis case definitions will be included. The studies must have a clear numerator and denominator in a well-defined population. Risk of bias will be evaluated by assessing all qualifying full-text articles for quality and eligibility using a modified quality score assessment tool. Standardised data extraction will be carried out after which descriptions of trends in the prevalence, incidence, as well as mortality rate and case fatality rate, will be done. Where sufficient data is available, the results will be stratified by age group, geography, location, vaccination and HIV status. The systematic review proposed by this protocol seeks to address the knowledge gap in the epidemiology of pertussis in LMICs for the first time. It is anticipated that the background epidemiological trends of pertussis in LMICs that our study will provide could be used in the planning for the control of pertussis. PROSPERO CRD42015015159. |
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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 84 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 20% |
| Researcher | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 19% |
| Unknown | 21 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 25 | 29% |
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 03 May 2015.
All research outputs
#15,331,767
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,590
of 1,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,001
of 264,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#35
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,995 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 264,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.