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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Role of Metallic Nanoparticles in Vaccinology: Implications for Infectious Disease Vaccine Development
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in immunology, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00239 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lázaro Moreira Marques Neto, André Kipnis, Ana Paula Junqueira-Kipnis |
| Abstract |
Subunit vaccines are safer but less immunogenic than live-attenuated vaccines or whole cell inactivated vaccines. Adjuvants are used to enhance and modulate antigen (Ag) immunogenicity, aiming to induce a protective and long-lasting immune response. Several molecules and formulations have been studied for their adjuvanticity, but only seven have been approved to formulate human vaccines. Metallic nanoparticles (MeNPs), particularly those containing gold and iron oxides, are widely used in medicine for diagnosis and therapy and have been used as carriers for drugs and vaccines. However, little is known about the immune response elicited by MeNPs or about their importance in the development of new vaccines. There is evidence that these particles display adjuvant characteristics, promoting cell recruitment, antigen-presenting cell activation, cytokine production, and inducing a humoral immune response. This review focuses on the characteristics of MeNPs that could facilitate the induction of a cellular immune response, particularly T-helper 1 and T-helper 17, and their potential functions as adjuvants for subunit vaccines. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 8% |
| United States | 1 | 8% |
| Argentina | 1 | 8% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 132 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 17% |
| Researcher | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 19 | 14% |
| Unknown | 33 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 24 | 18% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 14 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 14 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 42 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 06 February 2024.
All research outputs
#4,612,078
of 25,470,300 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#4,959
of 31,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,648
of 321,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#82
of 433 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,470,300 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,744 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 321,377 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 433 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.