↓ Skip to main content

The safety and efficacy of the tetanus vaccine intramuscularly versus subcutaneously in anticoagulated patients: a randomized clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
The safety and efficacy of the tetanus vaccine intramuscularly versus subcutaneously in anticoagulated patients: a randomized clinical trial
Published in
BMC Primary Care, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2296-15-147
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernando I Lago-Deibe, Maria-Victoria Martín-Miguel, Carmen Velicia-Peñas, Isabel Rey Gómez-Serranillos, Manuela Fontanillo-Fontanillo

Abstract

In patients treated with oral anticoagulants, subcutaneous injections of anti-tetanus vaccine are usually recommended to reduce the risk of bleeding, although the effectiveness of the vaccine has only been proven for intramuscular injection. The objective of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of intramuscular and subcutaneous injections of tetanus-diphtheria vaccine in patients treated with oral anticoagulants.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 15 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 16 38%
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 08 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,276,973
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,205
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,084
of 247,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#14
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 247,674 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.