↓ Skip to main content

Measles

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 10: Measles: old vaccines, new vaccines.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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.
Chapter title
Measles: old vaccines, new vaccines.
Chapter number 10
Book title
Measles
Published in
Current topics in microbiology and immunology, February 2009
DOI 10.1007/978-3-540-70617-5_10
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-54-070616-8, 978-3-54-070617-5
Authors

Griffin DE, Pan CH, D. E. Griffin, C. -H. Pan

Abstract

Isolation of measles virus in tissue culture by Enders and colleagues in the 1960s led to the development of the first measles vaccines. An inactivated vaccine provided only short-term protection and induced poor T cell responses and antibody that did not undergo affinity maturation. The response to this vaccine primed for atypical measles, a more severe form of measles, and was withdrawn. A live attenuated virus vaccine has been highly successful in protection from measles and in elimination of endemic measles virus transmission with the use of two doses. This vaccine is administered by injection between 9 and 15 months of age. Measles control would be facilitated if infants could be immunized at a younger age, if the vaccine were thermostable, and if delivery did not require a needle and syringe. To these ends, new vaccines are under development using macaques as an animal model and various combinations of the H, F, and N viral proteins. Promising studies have been reported using DNA vaccines, subunit vaccines, and virus-vectored vaccines.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 24%
Student > Bachelor 9 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 10%
Chemistry 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 7 17%

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 07 May 2019.
All research outputs
#3,899,718
of 14,976,421 outputs
Outputs from Current topics in microbiology and immunology
#90
of 562 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,155
of 287,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current topics in microbiology and immunology
#4
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,976,421 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 562 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 287,106 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 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 90% of its contemporaries.