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 |
Selection and Interpretation of Scientific Evidence in Preparation for Policy Decisions: A Case Study Regarding Introduction of Rotavirus Vaccine Into National Immunization Programs in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Public Health, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00131 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gry St-Martin, Ann Lindstrand, Synne Sandbu, Thea Kølsen Fischer |
| Abstract |
The World Health Organization recommends inclusion of rotavirus vaccines in national immunization programs (NIPs) worldwide. Nordic countries are usually considered comparable in terms of demographics and health-care services and have comparable rotavirus disease burden. Nevertheless, the countries have reached different decisions regarding rotavirus vaccine: Norway and Finland have already introduced rotavirus vaccines into their NIPs and Sweden is currently changing its recommendation and vaccines will now be introduced on a national scale while Denmark has decided against it. This study focuses on the selection and interpretation of medical and epidemiological evidence used during the decision-making processes in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. The so-called "severity criteria" is identified as one of the main reasons for the different policy decisions reached across the Nordic countries. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 18% |
| Researcher | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 12% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Engineering | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 53% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 22 December 2021.
All research outputs
#5,972,694
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,050
of 11,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,966
of 328,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#48
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,549 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 328,984 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.