↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of Approaches to Identify the Targets of Cellular Immunity on a Proteome-Wide Scale

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
Evaluation of Approaches to Identify the Targets of Cellular Immunity on a Proteome-Wide Scale
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0027666
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernanda C. Cardoso, Joanne S. Roddick, Penny Groves, Denise L. Doolan

Abstract

Vaccine development against malaria and other complex diseases remains a challenge for the scientific community. The recent elucidation of the genome, proteome and transcriptome of many of these complex pathogens provides the basis for rational vaccine design by identifying, on a proteome-wide scale, novel target antigens that are recognized by T cells and antibodies from exposed individuals. However, there is currently no algorithm to effectively identify important target antigens from genome sequence data; this is especially challenging for T cell targets. Furthermore, for some of these pathogens, such as Plasmodium, protein expression using conventional platforms has been problematic but cell-free in vitro transcription translation (IVTT) strategies have recently proved successful. Herein, we report a novel approach for proteome-wide scale identification of the antigenic targets of T cell responses using IVTT products.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Vietnam 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 32 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 26%
Researcher 8 23%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 26%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 4 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 November 2011.
All research outputs
#18,300,116
of 22,656,971 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#153,699
of 193,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,696
of 142,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,129
of 2,600 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,656,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,432 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 142,154 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,600 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.