↓ Skip to main content

Poliovirus

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'Poliovirus'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 An Introduction to Poliovirus: Pathogenesis, Vaccination, and the Endgame for Global Eradication
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 Poliovirus Laboratory Based Surveillance: An Overview
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 Isolation and Characterization of Enteroviruses from Clinical Samples
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 Isolation and Characterization of Poliovirus in Cell Culture Systems
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 Molecular Characterization of Polio from Environmental Samples: ISSP, The Israeli Sewage Surveillance Protocol
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Quality Assurance in the Polio Laboratory. Cell Sensitivity and Cell Authentication Assays
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 A Transgenic Mouse Model of Poliomyelitis
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Poliovirus
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Poliovirus
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 Isolation and Characterization of Vaccine-Derived Polioviruses, Relevance for the Global Polio Eradication Initiative
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Poliovirus
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 Generation of Infectious Poliovirus with Altered Genetic Information from Cloned cDNA
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 A Rapid Method for Engineering Recombinant Polioviruses or Other Enteroviruses
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 Methods to Monitor Molecular Consistency of Oral Polio Vaccine
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 Methods for the Quality Control of Inactivated Poliovirus Vaccines.
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 Measuring Poliovirus Antigenicity by Surface Plasmon Resonance. Application for Potency Indicating Assays
  18. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 17 Identification and Analysis of Antiviral Compounds Against Poliovirus
Attention for Chapter 15: Methods for the Quality Control of Inactivated Poliovirus Vaccines.
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Methods for the Quality Control of Inactivated Poliovirus Vaccines.
Chapter number 15
Book title
Poliovirus
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-3292-4_15
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-3291-7, 978-1-4939-3292-4
Authors

Wilton, Thomas, Thomas Wilton

Abstract

Inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) plays an instrumental role in the Global Poliovirus Eradication Initiative (GPEI). The quality of IPV is controlled by assessment of the potency of vaccine batches. The potency of IPV can be assessed by both in vivo and in vitro methods. In vitro potency assessment is based upon the assessment of the quantity of the D-Antigen (D-Ag) units in an IPV. The D-Ag unit is used as a measure of potency as it is largely expressed on native infectious virions and is the protective immunogen. The most commonly used in vitro test is the indirect ELISA which is used to ensure consistency throughout production.A range of in vivo assays have been developed in monkeys, chicks, guinea pigs, mice, and rats to assess the potency of IPV. All are based on assessment of the neutralizing antibody titer within the sera of the respective animal model. The rat potency test has become the favored in vivo potency test as it shows minimal variation between laboratories and the antibody patterns of rats and humans are similar. With the development of transgenic mice expressing the human poliovirus receptor, immunization-challenge tests have been developed to assess the potency of IPVs. This chapter describes in detail the methodology of these three laboratory tests to assess the quality of IPVs.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 42%
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 3 25%
Social Sciences 2 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 2 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,941,392
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#10,192
of 13,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#333,625
of 396,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#1,070
of 1,463 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,353 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 396,838 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,463 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.