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 |
The Use of Hyperimmune Chicken Reference Sera Is Not Appropriate for the Validation of Influenza Pseudotype Neutralization Assays
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pathogens, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3390/pathogens6040045 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francesca Ferrara, Eleonora Molesti, Simon Scott, Giovanni Cattoli, Nigel Temperton |
| Abstract |
The pseudotype particle neutralization test (pp-NT) is a next-generation serological assay employed for the sensitive study of influenza antibody responses against hemagglutinin (HA), including stalk-directed antibodies. However, a validation of this assay has yet to be performed, and this limits its use to primarily research laboratories. To identify possible serological standards to be used in optimization and validation of the pp-NT, we have evaluated the cross-reactivity of hyperimmune chicken reference antisera in this assay. Our findings show that the cross-reactivity detected by the pp-NT is only partly explained by phylogenetic relationships and protein homology between the HA subtypes analysed; further studies are necessary to understand the origin of the cross-reactivity detected, and reference standards with higher specificity should be evaluated or generated de novo for future use in pp-NT. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 7 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 1 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 14% |
| Researcher | 1 | 14% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 29% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 14% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,956,098
of 23,003,906 outputs
Outputs from Pathogens
#1,652
of 3,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,486
of 320,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pathogens
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,003,906 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,728 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 320,342 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.