↓ Skip to main content

Human Immune Responses to Dengue Virus Infection: Lessons Learned from Prospective Cohort Studies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 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
Human Immune Responses to Dengue Virus Infection: Lessons Learned from Prospective Cohort Studies
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, April 2014
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00183
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timothy P. Endy

Abstract

Dengue virus (DENV) continues to spread globally and is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Currently, there is no antiviral treatment to diminish severe illness or a vaccine to induce protection from infection. An effective dengue vaccine that protects against all four DENV serotypes is a high priority for endemic countries and several candidates are in development by various United States Federal Agencies and private pharmaceutical companies. Challenges faced by dengue vaccine developers include creating tetravalent formulations that provide tetravalent protection, the lack of a correlate of protective immunity, a changing viral landscape as DENV evolves, and a complex viral-host pathogenesis that can result in a spectrum of illness from subclinical infection to severe hemorrhagic fever. There have been a number of long-term prospective studies on DENV transmission and dengue severity that have provided invaluable information on DENV epidemiology and pathogenesis of this disease. In this section, we will review the critical lessons learned from these studies and their application for dengue vaccine development.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 105 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 19%
Researcher 19 17%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Student > Master 13 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 20 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 6%
Mathematics 4 4%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 23 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 March 2018.
All research outputs
#8,261,756
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#10,111
of 31,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,645
of 241,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#36
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 241,713 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 148 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 70% of its contemporaries.