↓ Skip to main content

The use of vaccines to control pathogen spread in pig populations

Overview of attention for article published in Porcine Health Management, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
The use of vaccines to control pathogen spread in pig populations
Published in
Porcine Health Management, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40813-017-0053-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolas Rose, Mathieu Andraud

Abstract

Vaccine efficacy has often been studied from the viewpoint of individual direct clinical protection. For several vaccines, a decrease in pathogen shedding in vaccinated animals has also been documented, which suggests that transmission between individuals has the potential to be reduced. In addition, vaccination induces an immune response in the host potentially decreasing susceptibility to infection in comparison with immunologically naïve animals. As a collective result of individual vaccinations, vaccine programmes generally have a wider impact on pathogen diffusion at the population scale. Beyond the individual protection conferred by mass vaccination campaigns, the indirect protection of non-immune individuals in contact with vaccinated ones also contributes to controlling pathogen spread at the population scale; a phenomenon known as herd immunity. Pathogen spread within pig populations is strongly related to the required vaccine coverage at the population level and to pathogen characteristics in terms of diffusion ([Formula: see text]). Before setting up vaccination programmes, it is therefore necessary to have quantitative knowledge on vaccine efficacy as regards transmission reduction. These data can be obtained by carrying out experimental studies or observational protocols in real conditions. These quantitative data have mainly been estimated for major infectious diseases which have now been eradicated. A great gap in knowledge has however been identified for enzootic diseases which are daily impacting the swine sector as well as for the source of variation responsible for a decrease in vaccine efficacy as compared to assessments obtained in experimental conditions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 20%
Student > Bachelor 6 17%
Student > Master 6 17%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 10 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Unknown 11 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 March 2017.
All research outputs
#14,339,070
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Porcine Health Management
#124
of 222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,650
of 311,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Porcine Health Management
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 222 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 311,254 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.