↓ Skip to main content

Vaccines for women for preventing neonatal tetanus

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2015
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 (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
182 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 women for preventing neonatal tetanus
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002959.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vittorio Demicheli, Antonella Barale, Alessandro Rivetti

Abstract

Tetanus is an acute, often fatal, disease caused by an exotoxin produced by Clostridium tetani. It occurs in newborn infants born to mothers who do not have sufficient circulating antibodies to protect the infant passively, by transplacental transfer. Prevention may be possible by the vaccination of pregnant or non-pregnant women, or both, with tetanus toxoid, and the provision of clean delivery services. Tetanus toxoid consists of a formaldehyde-treated toxin that stimulates the production of antitoxin. To assess the effectiveness of tetanus toxoid, administered to women of reproductive age or pregnant women, to prevent cases of, and deaths from, neonatal tetanus. We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 January 2015), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 1), PubMed (1966 to 28 January 2015), EMBASE (1974 to 28 January 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. Randomised or quasi-randomised trials evaluating the effects of tetanus toxoid in pregnant women or women of reproductive age on numbers of neonatal tetanus cases and deaths. Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. Two effectiveness trials (9823 infants) and one safety trial (48 mothers) were included. The main outcomes were measured on infants born to a subset of those randomised women who became pregnant during the course of the studies. For our primary outcomes, there was no high-quality evidence according to GRADE assessments.One study (1182 infants) assessed the effectiveness of tetanus toxoid in comparison with influenza vaccine in preventing neonatal tetanus deaths. A single dose did not provide significant protection against neonatal tetanus deaths, (risk ratio (RR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.24; 494 infants; GRADE: low-quality evidence). However, a two- or three-dose course did provide protection against neonatal deaths, (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.30; 688 infants; GRADE: moderate-quality evidence). Administration of a two- or three-dose course resulted in significant protection when all causes of death are considered as an outcome (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.55; 688 infants; GRADE: moderate-quality evidence). No effect was detected on causes of death other than tetanus. Cases of neonatal tetanus after at least one dose of tetanus toxoid were reduced in the tetanus toxoid group, (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.40; 1182 infants; GRADE: moderate-quality evidence).Another study, involving 8641 children, assessed the effectiveness of tetanus-diphtheria toxoid in comparison with cholera toxoid in preventing neonatal mortality after one or two doses. Neonatal mortality was reduced in the tetanus-diphtheria toxoid group (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.82). In preventing deaths at four to 14 days, neonatal mortality was reduced again in the tetanus-diphtheria toxoid group (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.55). The quality of evidence as assessed using GRADE was found to be low.The third small trial assessed that pain at injection site was reported more frequently among pregnant women who received tetanus diphtheria acellular pertussis than placebo (RR 5.68, 95% CI 1.54 to 20.94; GRADE: moderate-quality evidence). Available evidence supports the implementation of immunisation practices on women of reproductive age or pregnant women in communities with similar, or higher, levels of risk of neonatal tetanus, to the two study sites.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 182 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 178 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 20%
Student > Bachelor 25 14%
Researcher 23 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 13%
Student > Postgraduate 9 5%
Other 29 16%
Unknown 36 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 16%
Social Sciences 12 7%
Psychology 10 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 22 12%
Unknown 44 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 07 July 2017.
All research outputs
#785,174
of 14,611,689 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,321
of 11,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,355
of 230,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#69
of 262 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,611,689 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,029 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 230,445 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 262 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.