↓ Skip to main content

Epstein Barr Virus Volume 2

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 16: The Development of Prophylactic and Therapeutic EBV Vaccines.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
The Development of Prophylactic and Therapeutic EBV Vaccines.
Chapter number 16
Book title
Epstein Barr Virus Volume 2
Published in
Current topics in microbiology and immunology, January 2015
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-22834-1_16
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-922833-4, 978-3-31-922834-1
Authors

Smith, Corey, Khanna, Rajiv, Corey Smith, Rajiv Khanna

Abstract

Over the last century, the development of effective vaccine approaches to treat a number of viral infections has provided the impetus for the continual development of vaccine platforms for other viral infections, including Epstein-Barr virus (EBV). The clinical manifestations associated with EBV infection occur either following primary infection, such as infectious mononucleosis, or following an extended period of latency, primarily the EBV-associated malignancies and potentially including a number of autoimmune disorders, such as multiple sclerosis. As a consequence, two independent vaccine approaches are under development to prevent or control EBV-associated diseases. The first approach, which has been widely successful against other viral infections, is aimed at inducing a viral neutralisation antibody response to prevent primary infection. The second approach focuses upon the induction of cell-mediated immunity to control latent infected cells in persistently infected individuals. Early clinical studies have offered some insight into the potential efficacy of both of these approaches.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Master 4 10%
Other 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 15 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 10%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 18 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 May 2016.
All research outputs
#6,282,360
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Current topics in microbiology and immunology
#147
of 689 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,015
of 356,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current topics in microbiology and immunology
#9
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 689 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. 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 356,631 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 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.