Nipah Virus
Springer US
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
| Chapter title |
Generation and Characterization of a Humanized Lung Xenograft Mouse Model for Studying Henipavirus Pathogenesis.
|
|---|---|
| Chapter number | 14 |
| Book title |
Nipah Virus
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-0716-3283-3_14 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-07-163282-6, 978-1-07-163283-3
|
| Authors |
Valbuena, Gustavo, Rockx, Barry, Escaffre, Olivier |
| Abstract |
The development of humanized mouse models has recently opened new avenues in the field of infectious diseases. These models allow research on many human viruses that were once difficult to study, because finding suitable animal models of infection can be challenging, cost prohibitive, and often do not entirely recapitulate all parameters of the disease. Here, we describe the procedure of human immune system reconstitution (humanization) of NOD.Cg-Prkdcscid Il2rgtm1Wjl/SzJ (NSG) mice by the bone marrow, liver, and thymus (BLT) reconstitution method as well as the process of human lung engraftment. We then describe how to infect these human lung grafts with the paramyxovirus Nipah virus (NiV) that can cause lethal respiratory disease in humans, and for which there is only limited understanding of pathogenesis to acute lung injury. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 3 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 11 | 73% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 93% |
| Scientists | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 67% |
| Librarian | 1 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 33% |
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 18 September 2023.
All research outputs
#4,799,618
of 26,160,558 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#1,244
of 14,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,007
of 487,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#38
of 715 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,160,558 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 14,538 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 487,032 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 715 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.