↓ Skip to main content

Rapid travel to a Zika vaccine: are we heading towards success or more questions?

Overview of attention for article published in Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, October 2018
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
patent
4 patents

Readers on

mendeley
44 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.
Article details
Title
Rapid travel to a Zika vaccine: are we heading towards success or more questions?
Published in
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, October 2018
DOI 10.1080/14712598.2018.1526277
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The emergence of the Zika virus (ZIKV) in Latin America in 2015-2016 led to an expeditious search for vaccine candidates, with a DNA-based candidate having progressed to Phase II. However, several features of ZIKV infection and epidemiology are not understood, which may be key to maximizing efficacy and ensuring safety of ZIKV vaccines. Areas covered: Conceivable problems related to vaccine development and policy include: (1) paucity of diagnostics to satisfactorily discriminate between past ZIKV and dengue virus (DENV) exposure; (2) insufficient knowledge of the mechanisms of ZIKV neurovirulence, amongst other unknowns in the biology of this infection, is particularly relevant from a vaccine safety perspective; and (3) the potential for disease enhancement, as observed with DENV infection and vaccine. Expert opinion: Vaccine candidates that entered phase I/II trials have demonstrated protection in naïve animal models, while ZIKV epidemics occurred in populations that had encountered DENV before. The resulting cross-reactive antibodies pose problems for reliable serologic diagnostic assays, and for the potential of disease enhancement. The alleged neurological complications also warrant further exploration in order to reassure regulators of the safety profile of these vaccines in target populations. These research aspects should be an integral part of the efforts to develop a vaccine.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 14 32%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 20%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 17 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 02 January 2024.
All research outputs
#4,627,207
of 24,682,395 outputs
Outputs from Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy
#343
of 1,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,753
of 349,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,682,395 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,953 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 349,272 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 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.