↓ Skip to main content

Human rotavirus vaccine Rotarix™ provides protection against diverse circulating rotavirus strains in African infants: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
118 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 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
Human rotavirus vaccine Rotarix™ provides protection against diverse circulating rotavirus strains in African infants: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-12-213
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Duncan Steele, Kathleen M Neuzil, Nigel A Cunliffe, Shabir A Madhi, Pieter Bos, Bagrey Ngwira, Desiree Witte, Stacy Todd, Cheryl Louw, Mari Kirsten, Sanet Aspinall, Leen Jan Van Doorn, Alain Bouckenooghe, Pemmaraju V Suryakiran, Htay Htay Han

Abstract

Rotaviruses are the most important cause of severe acute gastroenteritis worldwide in children <5 years of age. The human, G1P[8] rotavirus vaccine Rotarix™ significantly reduced severe rotavirus gastroenteritis episodes in a Phase III clinical trial conducted in infants in South Africa and Malawi. This paper examines rotavirus vaccine efficacy in preventing severe rotavirus gastroenteritis, during infancy, caused by the various G and P rotavirus types encountered during the first rotavirus-season.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Malawi 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 129 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 14%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Other 6 5%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 27 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 5%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 35 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 August 2020.
All research outputs
#13,135,772
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#3,145
of 7,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,412
of 168,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#29
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,642 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 168,451 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 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 72% of its contemporaries.