↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Article Metrics

Efficacy of a prophylactic adjuvanted bivalent L1 virus-like-particle vaccine against infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: an interim analysis of a phase III double-blind…

Overview of attention for article published in The Lancet, June 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
6 policy sources
twitter
150 tweeters
patent
1 patent
facebook
8 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
959 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
347 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Efficacy of a prophylactic adjuvanted bivalent L1 virus-like-particle vaccine against infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: an interim analysis of a phase III double-blind, randomised controlled trial
Published in
The Lancet, June 2007
DOI 10.1016/s0140-6736(07)60946-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jorma Paavonen, David Jenkins, F Xavier Bosch, Paulo Naud, Jorge Salmerón, Cosette M Wheeler, Song-Nan Chow, Dan L Apter, Henry C Kitchener, Xavier Castellsague, Newton S de Carvalho, S Rachel Skinner, Diane M Harper, James A Hedrick, Unnop Jaisamrarn, Genara AM Limson, Marc Dionne, Wim Quint, Bart Spiessens, Pascal Peeters, Frank Struyf, Susan L Wieting, Matti O Lehtinen, Gary Dubin

Abstract

The aim of this interim analysis of a large, international phase III study was to assess the efficacy of an AS04 adjuvanted L1 virus-like-particle prophylactic candidate vaccine against infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18 in young women.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 150 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 347 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 1%
Canada 5 1%
Japan 4 1%
Spain 3 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 324 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 66 19%
Student > Bachelor 55 16%
Student > Master 55 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 7%
Other 74 21%
Unknown 34 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 130 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 14 4%
Social Sciences 14 4%
Other 53 15%
Unknown 51 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 150. 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 February 2020.
All research outputs
#108,397
of 14,368,603 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#1,513
of 33,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#992
of 150,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#23
of 488 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,368,603 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 33,029 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 150,214 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 488 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 95% of its contemporaries.