↓ Skip to main content

The HIV-1 transmission bottleneck

Overview of attention for article published in Retrovirology, March 2017
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
115 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.
Title
The HIV-1 transmission bottleneck
Published in
Retrovirology, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12977-017-0343-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samuel Mundia Kariuki, Philippe Selhorst, Kevin K. Ariën, Jeffrey R. Dorfman

Abstract

It is well established that most new systemic infections of HIV-1 can be traced back to one or a limited number of founder viruses. Usually, these founders are more closely related to minor HIV-1 populations in the blood of the presumed donor than to more abundant lineages. This has led to the widely accepted idea that transmission selects for viral characteristics that facilitate crossing the mucosal barrier of the recipient's genital tract, although the specific selective forces or advantages are not completely defined. However, there are other steps along the way to becoming a founder virus at which selection may occur. These steps include the transition from the donor's general circulation to the genital tract compartment, survival within the transmission fluid, and establishment of a nascent stable local infection in the recipient's genital tract. Finally, there is the possibility that important narrowing events may also occur during establishment of systemic infection. This is suggested by the surprising observation that the number of founder viruses detected after transmission in intravenous drug users is also limited. Although some of these steps may be heavily selective, others may result mostly in a stochastic narrowing of the available founder pool. Collectively, they shape the initial infection in each recipient.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 17%
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Bachelor 17 15%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 29 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 18 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 32 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 30 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,779,015
of 23,573,233 outputs
Outputs from Retrovirology
#72
of 1,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,009
of 310,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Retrovirology
#4
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,573,233 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,118 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 310,105 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.