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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Engineering adeno-associated viral vectors to evade innate immune and inflammatory responses
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science Translational Medicine, February 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1126/scitranslmed.abd3438 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ying Kai Chan, Sean K Wang, Colin J Chu, David A Copland, Alexander J Letizia, Helena Costa Verdera, Jessica J Chiang, Meher Sethi, May K Wang, William J Neidermyer, Yingleong Chan, Elaine T Lim, Amanda R Graveline, Melinda Sanchez, Ryan F Boyd, Thomas S Vihtelic, Rolando Gian Carlo O Inciong, Jared M Slain, Priscilla J Alphonse, Yunlu Xue, Lindsey R Robinson-McCarthy, Jenny M Tam, Maha H Jabbar, Bhubanananda Sahu, Janelle F Adeniran, Manish Muhuri, Phillip W L Tai, Jun Xie, Tyler B Krause, Andyna Vernet, Matthew Pezone, Ru Xiao, Tina Liu, Wei Wang, Henry J Kaplan, Guangping Gao, Andrew D Dick, Federico Mingozzi, Maureen A McCall, Constance L Cepko, George M Church |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 109 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 39 | 36% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 6% |
| Singapore | 4 | 4% |
| Germany | 3 | 3% |
| Australia | 3 | 3% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Unknown | 42 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 66 | 61% |
| Scientists | 39 | 36% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 236 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 236 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 47 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 40 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 21 | 9% |
| Unknown | 85 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 51 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 25 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 23 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 17 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 4% |
| Other | 21 | 9% |
| Unknown | 89 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 129. 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 24 October 2023.
All research outputs
#328,622
of 25,721,020 outputs
Outputs from Science Translational Medicine
#934
of 5,471 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,214
of 546,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science Translational Medicine
#27
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,721,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,471 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 86.6. 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 546,821 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 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 73% of its contemporaries.