↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
7 patents

Readers on

mendeley
10 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
A Gag-Pol/Env-Rev SIV239 DNA vaccine improves CD4 counts, and reduce viral loads after pathogenic intrarectal SIVmac251 challenge in Rhesus Macaques
Published in
Vaccine, January 2003
DOI 10.1016/s0264-410x(02)00571-6
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

DNA vaccines are an important vaccine approach for many infectious diseases including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Recently, there have been exciting results reported for plasmid vaccination in pathogenic SHIV model systems. In these studies, plasmid vaccines supplemented by IL-2 Ig cytokine gene adjuvants or boosted by recombinant MVA vectors expressing relevant SIV and HIV antigens prevented CD4(+) T-cell loss and lowered viral loads following pathogenic challenge. However, similar results have not been reported in a direct pathogenic macaque challenge model. Here we report on a study of the ability of a multiplasmid SIV DNA vaccine in a pathogenic SIV251 rhesus mucosal challenge study. We observed that pGag/Pol+pEnv/Rev plasmid vaccines could not prevent SIV infection; however, vaccinated animals exhibited significant improvement in control of viral challenge compared to control animals. Furthermore, vaccinated animals exhibited protection against CD4(+) T-cell loss.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 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 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 20%
Researcher 2 20%
Other 1 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 10%
Professor 1 10%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 30%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 20%
Arts and Humanities 1 10%
Unknown 2 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 05 July 2016.
All research outputs
#5,046,170
of 34,043,423 outputs
Outputs from Vaccine
#5,442
of 20,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,785
of 202,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vaccine
#32
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,043,423 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,216 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 202,338 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 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 51% of its contemporaries.