The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39,614 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Safety and efficacy of an rAd26 and rAd5 vector-based heterologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccine: an interim analysis of a randomised controlled phase 3 trial in Russia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Lancet, February 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00234-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Denis Y Logunov, Inna V Dolzhikova, Dmitry V Shcheblyakov, Amir I Tukhvatulin, Olga V Zubkova, Alina S Dzharullaeva, Anna V Kovyrshina, Nadezhda L Lubenets, Daria M Grousova, Alina S Erokhova, Andrei G Botikov, Fatima M Izhaeva, Olga Popova, Tatiana A Ozharovskaya, Ilias B Esmagambetov, Irina A Favorskaya, Denis I Zrelkin, Daria V Voronina, Dmitry N Shcherbinin, Alexander S Semikhin, Yana V Simakova, Elizaveta A Tokarskaya, Daria A Egorova, Maksim M Shmarov, Natalia A Nikitenko, Vladimir A Gushchin, Elena A Smolyarchuk, Sergey K Zyryanov, Sergei V Borisevich, Boris S Naroditsky, Alexander L Gintsburg, Gam-COVID-Vac Vaccine Trial Group |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 4577 | 12% |
| Argentina | 3599 | 9% |
| United States | 1137 | 3% |
| Colombia | 901 | 2% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 781 | 2% |
| Spain | 752 | 2% |
| Chile | 524 | 1% |
| Uruguay | 440 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 434 | 1% |
| Other | 5892 | 15% |
| Unknown | 20577 | 52% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 37210 | 94% |
| Scientists | 1165 | 3% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 727 | 2% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 503 | 1% |
| Unknown | 9 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2,121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2121 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 321 | 15% |
| Researcher | 263 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 178 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 167 | 8% |
| Other | 116 | 5% |
| Other | 369 | 17% |
| Unknown | 707 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 501 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 207 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 97 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 94 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 87 | 4% |
| Other | 338 | 16% |
| Unknown | 797 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25560. 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 13 September 2024.
All research outputs
#13
of 26,812,496 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#1
of 43,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2
of 544,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#1
of 368 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,812,496 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 43,883 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 68.9. 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 544,859 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 368 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.