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 |
Comparative Analysis of DNA Nanoparticles and AAVs for Ocular Gene Delivery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0052189 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zongchao Han, Shannon M. Conley, Rasha Makkia, Junjing Guo, Mark J. Cooper, Muna I. Naash |
| Abstract |
Gene therapy is a critical tool for the treatment of monogenic retinal diseases. However, the limited vector capacity of the current benchmark delivery strategy, adeno-associated virus (AAV), makes development of larger capacity alternatives, such as compacted DNA nanoparticles (NPs), critical. Here we conduct a side-by-side comparison of self-complementary AAV and CK30PEG NPs using matched ITR plasmids. We report that although AAVs are more efficient per vector genome (vg) than NPs, NPs can drive gene expression on a comparable scale and longevity to AAV. We show that subretinally injected NPs do not leave the eye while some of the AAV-injected animals exhibited vector DNA and GFP expression in the visual pathways of the brain from PI-60 onward. As a result, these NPs have the potential to become a successful alternative for ocular gene therapy, especially for the multitude of genes too large for AAV vectors. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 62 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 11 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 19% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 15 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 28 November 2023.
All research outputs
#8,075,491
of 24,950,117 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#105,789
of 216,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,718
of 292,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,821
of 4,887 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,950,117 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 216,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 292,498 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,887 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 59% of its contemporaries.