↓ Skip to main content

Population-level impact and herd effects following the introduction of human papillomavirus vaccination programmes: updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in The Lancet, August 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 32,004)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Population-level impact and herd effects following the introduction of human papillomavirus vaccination programmes: updated systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
The Lancet, August 2019
DOI 10.1016/s0140-6736(19)30298-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mélanie Drolet, Élodie Bénard, Norma Pérez, Marc Brisson, Hammad Ali, Marie-Claude Boily, Vincenzo Baldo, Paul Brassard, Julia M L Brotherton, Denton Callander, Marta Checchi, Eric P F Chow, Silvia Cocchio, Tina Dalianis, Shelley L Deeks, Christian Dehlendorff, Basil Donovan, Christopher K Fairley, Elaine W Flagg, Julia W Gargano, Suzanne M Garland, Nathalie Grün, Bo T Hansen, Christopher Harrison, Eva Herweijer, Teresa M Imburgia, Anne M Johnson, Jessica A Kahn, Kimberley Kavanagh, Susanne K Kjaer, Erich V Kliewer, Bette Liu, Dorothy A Machalek, Lauri Markowitz, David Mesher, Christian Munk, Linda Niccolai, Mari Nygård, Gina Ogilvie, Jeannie Oliphant, Kevin G Pollock, Maria Jesús Purriños-Hermida, Megan A Smith, Marc Steben, Anna Söderlund-Strand, Pam Sonnenberg, Pär Sparen, Clare Tanton, Cosette M Wheeler, Petra J Woestenberg, Bo Nancy Yu

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3,248 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 20%
Researcher 10 20%
Other 6 12%
Unspecified 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 16 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 43%
Unspecified 14 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 9 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2355. 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 18 September 2019.
All research outputs
#517
of 13,532,302 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#31
of 32,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27
of 247,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#3
of 475 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,532,302 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,004 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 247,456 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 475 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 99% of its contemporaries.