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 |
Elderly Subjects Have a Delayed Antibody Response and Prolonged Viraemia following Yellow Fever Vaccination: A Prospective Controlled Cohort Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0027753 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna H. Roukens, Darius Soonawala, Simone A. Joosten, Adriëtte W. de Visser, Xiaohong Jiang, Kees Dirksen, Marjolein de Gruijter, Jaap T. van Dissel, Peter J. Bredenbeek, Leo G. Visser |
| Abstract |
Yellow fever vaccination (YF-17D) can cause serious adverse events (SAEs). The mechanism of these SAEs is poorly understood. Older age has been identified as a risk factor. We tested the hypothesis that the humoral immune response to yellow fever vaccine develops more slowly in elderly than in younger subjects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 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% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 91 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 11% |
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Unknown | 12 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 36% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 15% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 11 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Unknown | 18 | 19% |
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 04 May 2020.
All research outputs
#1,040,060
of 24,397,600 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#13,652
of 210,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,318
of 249,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#139
of 2,890 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,397,600 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 210,371 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 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 249,148 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,890 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 95% of its contemporaries.