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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Epidermal injury and infection during poxvirus immunization is crucial for the generation of highly protective T cell–mediated immunity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Medicine, January 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nm.2078 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luzheng Liu, Qiong Zhong, Tian Tian, Krista Dubin, Shruti K Athale, Thomas S Kupper |
| Abstract |
Variola major (smallpox) infection claimed hundreds of millions lives before it was eradicated by a simple vaccination strategy: epicutaneous application of the related orthopoxvirus vaccinia virus (VACV) to superficially injured skin (skin scarification, s.s.). However, the remarkable success of this strategy was attributed to the immunogenicity of VACV rather than to the unique mode of vaccine delivery. We now show that VACV immunization via s.s., but not conventional injection routes, is essential for the generation of superior T cell-mediated immune responses that provide complete protection against subsequent challenges, independent of neutralizing antibodies. Skin-resident effector memory T cells (T(EM) cells) provide complete protection against cutaneous challenge, whereas protection against lethal respiratory challenge requires both respiratory mucosal T(EM) cells and central memory T cells (T(CM) cells). Vaccination with recombinant VACV (rVACV) expressing a tumor antigen was protective against tumor challenge only if delivered via the s.s. route; it was ineffective if delivered by hypodermic injection. The clinically safer nonreplicative modified vaccinia Ankara virus (MVA) also generated far superior protective immunity when delivered via the s.s. route compared to intramuscular (i.m.) injection as used in MVA clinical trials. Thus, delivery of rVACV-based vaccines, including MVA vaccines, through physically disrupted epidermis has clear-cut advantages over conventional vaccination via hypodermic injection. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 3% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 166 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 51 | 29% |
| Researcher | 45 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 12% |
| Unknown | 27 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 62 | 35% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 41 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 4% |
| Unknown | 31 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 16 November 2023.
All research outputs
#3,025,473
of 23,317,888 outputs
Outputs from Nature Medicine
#4,261
of 8,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,088
of 167,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Medicine
#30
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,317,888 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,610 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 100.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 167,045 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 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.