↓ Skip to main content

Yersinia pestis: Retrospective and Perspective

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 12: Plague Vaccines: Status and Future.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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.
Chapter title
Plague Vaccines: Status and Future.
Chapter number 12
Book title
Yersinia pestis: Retrospective and Perspective
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-94-024-0890-4_12
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-9-40-240888-1, 978-9-40-240890-4
Authors

Wei Sun, Sun, Wei, Wei Sun, Dr.

Editors

Ruifu Yang, Andrey Anisimov

Abstract

Three major plague pandemics caused by the gram-negative bacterium Yersinia pestis have killed nearly 200 million people in human history. Due to its extreme virulence and the ease of its transmission, Y. pestis has been used purposefully for biowarfare in the past. Currently, plague epidemics are still breaking out sporadically in most of parts of the world, including the United States. Approximately 2000 cases of plague are reported each year to the World Health Organization. However, the potential use of the bacteria in modern times as an agent of bioterrorism and the emergence of a Y. pestis strain resistant to eight antibiotics bring out severe public health concerns. Therefore, prophylactic vaccination against this disease holds the brightest prospect for its long-term prevention. Here, we summarize the progress of the current vaccine development for counteracting plague.

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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 18%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Professor 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 9 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 14%
Environmental Science 3 11%
Engineering 3 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 9 32%
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 28 September 2020.
All research outputs
#6,444,961
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#1,017
of 4,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,696
of 393,734 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#98
of 443 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,952 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 393,734 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 443 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.