↓ Skip to main content

Ricin and Shiga Toxins

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 156: Ricin Vaccine Development.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 684)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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.
Chapter title
Ricin Vaccine Development.
Chapter number 156
Book title
Ricin and Shiga Toxins
Published in
Current topics in microbiology and immunology, August 2011
DOI 10.1007/82_2011_156
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-64-227469-5, 978-3-64-227470-1
Authors

Smallshaw JE, Vitetta ES, Joan E. Smallshaw, Ellen S. Vitetta, Smallshaw, Joan E., Vitetta, Ellen S.

Abstract

In this chapter we discuss vaccines to protect against the highly toxic plant-derived toxin, ricin. Due to its prevalence, ease of use, and stability it has been used in sporadic incidents of espionage. There is also concern that it will be used as an agent of bioterrorism. As a result there has been a great deal of interest in developing a safe vaccine or antidote to protect humans, and in particular soldiers and first responders. Although multiple types of vaccines have been tested, at this time two recombinant vaccines are the leading candidates for the national vaccine stockpile. In terms of passive post-exposure protection, monoclonal neutralizing antibodies that passively protect animals are also under development. These vaccines and antibodies are discussed in the context of the toxicity and structure of ricin.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 6%
Professor 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 8 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 11%
Chemistry 3 9%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 8 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 19 February 2022.
All research outputs
#2,040,818
of 23,153,849 outputs
Outputs from Current topics in microbiology and immunology
#46
of 684 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,837
of 120,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current topics in microbiology and immunology
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,153,849 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 684 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 120,663 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them