↓ Skip to main content

Potent protection against H5N1 and H7N9 influenza via childhood hemagglutinin imprinting

Overview of attention for article published in Science, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
373 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
354 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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.
Title
Potent protection against H5N1 and H7N9 influenza via childhood hemagglutinin imprinting
Published in
Science, November 2016
DOI 10.1126/science.aag1322
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katelyn M Gostic, Monique Ambrose, Michael Worobey, James O Lloyd-Smith

Abstract

Two zoonotic influenza A viruses (IAV) of global concern, H5N1 and H7N9, exhibit unexplained differences in age distribution of human cases. Using data from all known human cases of these viruses, we show that an individual's first IAV infection confers lifelong protection against severe disease from novel hemagglutinin (HA) subtypes in the same phylogenetic group. Statistical modeling shows that protective HA imprinting is the crucial explanatory factor, and it provides 75% protection against severe infection and 80% protection against death for both H5N1 and H7N9. Our results enable us to predict age distributions of severe disease for future pandemics and demonstrate that a novel strain's pandemic potential increases yearly when a group-mismatched HA subtype dominates seasonal influenza circulation. These findings open new frontiers for rational pandemic risk assessment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 192 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 354 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Vietnam 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 347 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 84 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 81 23%
Student > Bachelor 38 11%
Student > Master 28 8%
Professor 15 4%
Other 50 14%
Unknown 58 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 77 22%
Immunology and Microbiology 61 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 44 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 8%
Engineering 9 3%
Other 63 18%
Unknown 70 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1561. 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 29 December 2023.
All research outputs
#7,406
of 25,722,279 outputs
Outputs from Science
#401
of 83,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96
of 317,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#4
of 1,141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,722,279 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83,260 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 65.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 317,724 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.