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 |
Why was PERV not transmitted during preclinical and clinical xenotransplantation trials and after inoculation of animals?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Retrovirology, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12977-018-0411-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joachim Denner |
| Abstract |
Porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs) are present in the genome of all pigs, they infect certain human cells and therefore pose a special risk for xenotransplantation using pig cells, tissues and organs. Xenotransplantation is being developed in order to alleviate the reduced availability of human organs. Despite the fact that PERVs are able to infect certain human cells and cells from other species, transmission of PERVs has not been observed when animals (including non-human primates) were inoculated with PERV preparations or during preclinical xenotransplantations. The data indicate that PERVs were not transmitted because they were not released from the transplant or were inhibited by intracellular restriction factors and innate immunity in the recipient. In a single study in guinea pigs, a transient PERV infection and anti-PERV antibodies were described, indicating that in this case at least, the immune system may also have been involved. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Greece | 1 | 10% |
| United States | 1 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 70% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 60% |
| Scientists | 3 | 30% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 20 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 18% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 7 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 23 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 October 2021.
All research outputs
#6,119,844
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Retrovirology
#297
of 1,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,288
of 330,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Retrovirology
#7
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 330,296 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 58% of its contemporaries.