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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Immunoblot analysis of natural and vaccine-induced IgG responses to rubella virus proteins expressed in insect cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Clinical Virology, October 1999
|
| DOI | 10.1016/s1386-6532(99)00048-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jasminka Nedeljkovic, Tanja Jovanovic, Srecko Mladjenovic, Klaus Hedman, Nina Peitsaro, Christian Oker-Blom |
| Abstract |
The three structural proteins of rubella virus (RV), the capsid protein C and the envelope glycoproteins E1 and E2, were produced individually in soluble form in Sf9 insect cells using the baculovirus system. All proteins were equipped with a polyhistidine tag at their C-terminal ends to enable gentle purification by metal ion affinity chromatography. In addition, the E1 and E2 proteins were engineered to display the FLAG epitope tag at their N-terminal ends. The diagnostic potential of the recombinant purified proteins was evaluated by immunoblot and enzyme immuno assays (EIA) using a total of 57 well-characterised serum samples obtained at various time points after natural RV infection, congenital rubella syndrome (CRS), MMR vaccination or from controls with past RV immunity. In addition, acute and convalescent phase serum pools from a total of 20 patients were evaluated. Authentic RV proteins were used as a reference. The recombinant E1 and C proteins were predominant in eliciting the immune response in both postnatal and vaccinal RV infections, being much weaker in the vaccinal ones. The IgG response to the recombinant C protein was very strong after the first month post infection and decreased with time. The immune response against the recombinant E2 protein, however, was generally poor, but notably stronger after congenital infection. Together, the results showed that the individual recombinant protein antigens could be suitable for diagnosis of RV infection and for study of the immune response to rubella vaccination. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 36% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 9% |
| Professor | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 18% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
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 10 October 2023.
All research outputs
#5,446,210
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Virology
#490
of 2,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,465
of 35,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Virology
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 2,312 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 35,602 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 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