↓ Skip to main content

Cross-reactivities between human IgMs and the four serotypes of dengue virus as probed with artificial homodimers of domain-III from the envelope proteins

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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.
Title
Cross-reactivities between human IgMs and the four serotypes of dengue virus as probed with artificial homodimers of domain-III from the envelope proteins
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-13-302
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nora Zidane, Philippe Dussart, Laetitia Bremand, Hugues Bedouelle

Abstract

Dengue fever is the most important vector-borne viral disease. Four serotypes of dengue virus, DENV1 to DENV4, coexist. Infection by one serotype elicits long-lasting immunity to that serotype but not the other three. Subsequent infection by a different serotype is a risk factor for severe dengue. Domain III (ED3) of the viral envelope protein interacts with cell receptors and contains epitopes recognized by neutralizing antibodies. We determined the serotype specificity and cross-reactivity of human IgMs directed against ED3 by using a well-characterized collection of 90 DENV-infected and 89 DENV-uninfected human serums.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 18%
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 9 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 12%
Chemistry 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 10 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 27 October 2016.
All research outputs
#3,181,732
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,050
of 7,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,689
of 194,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#17
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,657 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 194,634 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 147 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.