↓ Skip to main content

Human papillomavirus vaccine introduction in low-income and middle-income countries: guidance on the use of cost-effectiveness models

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, May 2011
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)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 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 papillomavirus vaccine introduction in low-income and middle-income countries: guidance on the use of cost-effectiveness models
Published in
BMC Medicine, May 2011
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-9-54
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Jit, Nadia Demarteau, Elamin Elbasha, Gary Ginsberg, Jane Kim, Naiyana Praditsitthikorn, Edina Sinanovic, Raymond Hutubessy

Abstract

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that the cost effectiveness of introducing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is considered before such a strategy is implemented. However, developing countries often lack the technical capacity to perform and interpret results of economic appraisals of vaccines. To provide information about the feasibility of using such models in a developing country setting, we evaluated models of HPV vaccination in terms of their capacity, requirements, limitations and comparability.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 110 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 22%
Researcher 23 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 9 8%
Other 22 19%
Unknown 16 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 29%
Social Sciences 13 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 12 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 22 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 01 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,183,204
of 14,554,924 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#917
of 2,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,181
of 132,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,554,924 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,274 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 132,686 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 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them