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 |
A Bivalent Omicron-Containing Booster Vaccine against Covid-19
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
New England Journal of Medicine, September 2022
|
| DOI | 10.1056/nejmoa2208343 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Spyros Chalkias, Charles Harper, Keith Vrbicky, Stephen R Walsh, Brandon Essink, Adam Brosz, Nichole McGhee, Joanne E Tomassini, Xing Chen, Ying Chang, Andrea Sutherland, David C Montefiori, Bethany Girard, Darin K Edwards, Jing Feng, Honghong Zhou, Lindsey R Baden, Jacqueline M Miller, Rituparna Das |
| Abstract |
The safety and immunogenicity of the bivalent omicron-containing mRNA-1273.214 booster vaccine are not known. In this ongoing, phase 2-3 study, we compared the 50-μg bivalent vaccine mRNA-1273.214 (25 μg each of ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 and omicron B.1.1.529 [BA.1] spike messenger RNAs) with the previously authorized 50-μg mRNA-1273 booster. We administered mRNA-1273.214 or mRNA-1273 as a second booster in adults who had previously received a two-dose (100-μg) primary series and first booster (50-μg) dose of mRNA-1273 (≥3 months earlier). The primary objectives were to assess the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of mRNA-1273.214 at 28 days after the booster dose. Interim results are presented. Sequential groups of participants received 50 μg of mRNA-1273.214 (437 participants) or mRNA-1273 (377 participants) as a second booster dose. The median time between the first and second boosters was similar for mRNA-1273.214 (136 days) and mRNA-1273 (134 days). In participants with no previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, the geometric mean titers of neutralizing antibodies against the omicron BA.1 variant were 2372.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2070.6 to 2718.2) after receipt of the mRNA-1273.214 booster and 1473.5 (95% CI, 1270.8 to 1708.4) after receipt of the mRNA-1273 booster. In addition, 50-μg mRNA-1273.214 and 50-μg mRNA-1273 elicited geometric mean titers of 727.4 (95% CI, 632.8 to 836.1) and 492.1 (95% CI, 431.1 to 561.9), respectively, against omicron BA.4 and BA.5 (BA.4/5), and the mRNA-1273.214 booster also elicited higher binding antibody responses against multiple other variants (alpha, beta, gamma, and delta) than the mRNA-1273 booster. Safety and reactogenicity were similar with the two booster vaccines. Vaccine effectiveness was not assessed in this study; in an exploratory analysis, SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred in 11 participants after the mRNA-1273.214 booster and in 9 participants after the mRNA-1273 booster. The bivalent omicron-containing vaccine mRNA-1273.214 elicited neutralizing antibody responses against omicron that were superior to those with mRNA-1273, without evident safety concerns. (Funded by Moderna; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04927065.). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2,021 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 253 | 13% |
| Japan | 114 | 6% |
| Canada | 75 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 60 | 3% |
| Australia | 37 | 2% |
| Spain | 34 | 2% |
| France | 32 | 2% |
| Germany | 30 | 1% |
| Poland | 18 | <1% |
| Other | 161 | 8% |
| Unknown | 1207 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1754 | 87% |
| Scientists | 138 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 103 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 25 | 1% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 272 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 272 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 36 | 13% |
| Other | 25 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 7% |
| Other | 43 | 16% |
| Unknown | 100 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 55 | 20% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 26 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 24 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 32 | 12% |
| Unknown | 113 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2350. 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 09 March 2024.
All research outputs
#3,492
of 25,753,578 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#216
of 32,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141
of 422,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#7
of 282 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,753,578 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 32,669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 122.8. 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 422,205 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 282 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 97% of its contemporaries.