↓ Skip to main content

Immune Activation and Collateral Damage in AIDS Pathogenesis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 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
Immune Activation and Collateral Damage in AIDS Pathogenesis
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2013.00298
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frank Miedema, Mette D. Hazenberg, Kiki Tesselaar, Debbie van Baarle, Rob J. de Boer, José A. M. Borghans

Abstract

In the past decade, evidence has accumulated that human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-induced chronic immune activation drives progression to AIDS. Studies among different monkey species have shown that the difference between pathological and non-pathological infection is determined by the response of the immune system to the virus, rather than its cytopathicity. Here we review the current understanding of the various mechanisms driving chronic immune activation in HIV infection, the cell types involved, its effects on HIV-specific immunity, and how persistent inflammation may cause AIDS and the wide spectrum of non-AIDS related pathology. We argue that therapeutic relief of inflammation may be beneficial to delay HIV-disease progression and to reduce non-AIDS related pathological side effects of HIV-induced chronic immune stimulation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 119 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 16%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Master 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Student > Postgraduate 12 10%
Other 27 22%
Unknown 18 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 22%
Immunology and Microbiology 13 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 22 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 October 2013.
All research outputs
#14,734,094
of 25,932,719 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#12,016
of 32,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,703
of 291,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#141
of 503 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,932,719 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,608 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 291,797 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 503 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 71% of its contemporaries.