↓ Skip to main content

Vaccination Strategies for Alzheimer’s Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs & Aging, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
16 patents
wikipedia
12 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
Vaccination Strategies for Alzheimer’s Disease
Published in
Drugs & Aging, September 2012
DOI 10.2165/00002512-200724020-00003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adele Woodhouse, Tracey C. Dickson, James C. Vickers

Abstract

The pathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD) include beta-amyloid (Abeta) plaques, dystrophic neurites and neurofibrillary pathology, which eventually result in the degeneration of neurons and subsequent dementia. In 1999, international interest in a new therapeutic approach to the treatment of AD was ignited following transgenic mouse studies that indicated that it might be possible to immunise against the pathological alterations in Abeta that lead to aggregation of this protein in the brain. A subsequent phase I human trial for safety, tolerability and immunogenicity using an active immunisation strategy against Abeta had a positive outcome. However, phase IIA human trials involving active immunisation were halted following the diagnosis of aseptic meningoencephalitis in 6% of immunised subjects. Research into immunisation strategies involving transgenic AD mouse models has subsequently been refocused to determine the mechanisms by which plaque clearance and reduced memory deficits are attained, and to establish safer therapeutic approaches that may reduce potentially harmful brain inflammation. The vigour of international research on immunotherapy for AD provides significant hope for a strong therapeutic lead for the escalating number of individuals who will develop this otherwise incurable condition.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 3%
Denmark 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 37 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 9 23%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 18%
Neuroscience 5 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Chemistry 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 26 November 2022.
All research outputs
#5,446,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Drugs & Aging
#374
of 1,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,939
of 188,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs & Aging
#85
of 372 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,293 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 188,185 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 372 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.