↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Vaccines and Antivirals during the Major 2009 A(H1N1) Pandemic Wave in Norway – And the Influence of Vaccination Timing

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2012
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Effect of Vaccines and Antivirals during the Major 2009 A(H1N1) Pandemic Wave in Norway – And the Influence of Vaccination Timing
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0030018
Pubmed ID
Authors

Birgitte Freiesleben de Blasio, Bjørn G. Iversen, Gianpaolo Scalia Tomba

Abstract

To evaluate the impact of mass vaccination with adjuvanted vaccines (eventually 40% population coverage) and antivirals during the 2009 influenza pandemic in Norway, we fitted an age-structured SEIR model using data on vaccinations and sales of antivirals in 2009/10 in Norway to Norwegian ILI surveillance data from 5 October 2009 to 4 January 2010. We estimate a clinical attack rate of approximately 30% (28.7-29.8%), with highest disease rates among children 0-14 years (43-44%). Vaccination started in week 43 and came too late to have a strong influence on the pandemic in Norway. Our results indicate that the countermeasures prevented approximately 11-12% of potential cases relative to an unmitigated pandemic. Vaccination was found responsible for roughly 3 in 4 of the avoided infections. An estimated 50% reduction in the clinical attack rate would have resulted from vaccination alone, had the campaign started 6 weeks earlier. Had vaccination been prioritized for children first, the intervention should have commenced approximately 5 weeks earlier in order to achieve the same 50% reduction. In comparison, we estimate that a non-adjuvanted vaccination program should have started 8 weeks earlier to lower the clinical attack rate by 50%. In conclusion, vaccination timing was a critical factor in relation to the spread of the 2009 A(H1N1) influenza. Our results also corroborate the central role of children for the transmission of A(H1N1) pandemic influenza.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 48 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Master 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Other 3 6%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 11 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 27 May 2020.
All research outputs
#2,354,859
of 22,661,413 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#30,046
of 193,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,993
of 243,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#374
of 3,220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,661,413 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,502 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 243,229 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,220 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.