↓ Skip to main content

Imperfect Vaccination Can Enhance the Transmission of Highly Virulent Pathogens

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Biology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 6,164)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
233 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
453 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Imperfect Vaccination Can Enhance the Transmission of Highly Virulent Pathogens
Published in
PLoS Biology, July 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002198
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew F. Read, Susan J. Baigent, Claire Powers, Lydia B. Kgosana, Luke Blackwell, Lorraine P. Smith, David A. Kennedy, Stephen W. Walkden-Brown, Venugopal K. Nair

Abstract

Could some vaccines drive the evolution of more virulent pathogens? Conventional wisdom is that natural selection will remove highly lethal pathogens if host death greatly reduces transmission. Vaccines that keep hosts alive but still allow transmission could thus allow very virulent strains to circulate in a population. Here we show experimentally that immunization of chickens against Marek's disease virus enhances the fitness of more virulent strains, making it possible for hyperpathogenic strains to transmit. Immunity elicited by direct vaccination or by maternal vaccination prolongs host survival but does not prevent infection, viral replication or transmission, thus extending the infectious periods of strains otherwise too lethal to persist. Our data show that anti-disease vaccines that do not prevent transmission can create conditions that promote the emergence of pathogen strains that cause more severe disease in unvaccinated hosts.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16,671 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 453 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 9 2%
United Kingdom 5 1%
Germany 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 433 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 95 21%
Researcher 78 17%
Student > Bachelor 50 11%
Student > Master 48 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 6%
Other 90 20%
Unknown 63 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 146 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 45 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 43 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 35 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 31 7%
Other 69 15%
Unknown 84 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12748. 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 September 2022.
All research outputs
#95
of 22,150,339 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Biology
#1
of 6,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1
of 250,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Biology
#1
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,150,339 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 6,164 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.7. 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 250,001 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 74 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 98% of its contemporaries.