↓ Skip to main content

Treatment with MOG-DNA vaccines induces CD4+CD25+FoxP3+ regulatory T cells and up-regulates genes with neuroprotective functions in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuroinflammation, June 2012
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 (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 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
Treatment with MOG-DNA vaccines induces CD4+CD25+FoxP3+ regulatory T cells and up-regulates genes with neuroprotective functions in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis
Published in
Journal of Neuroinflammation, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1742-2094-9-139
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolás Fissolo, Carme Costa, Ramil N Nurtdinov, Marta F Bustamante, Victor Llombart, María J Mansilla, Carmen Espejo, Xavier Montalban, Manuel Comabella

Abstract

DNA vaccines represent promising therapeutic strategies in autoimmune disorders such as multiple sclerosis (MS). However, the precise mechanisms by which DNA vaccines induce immune regulation remain largely unknown. Here, we aimed to expand previous knowledge existing on the mechanisms of action of DNA vaccines in the animal model of MS, experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), by treating EAE mice with a DNA vaccine encoding the myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG), and exploring the therapeutic effects on the disease-induced inflammatory and neurodegenerative changes.

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 %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 59 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 27%
Researcher 11 18%
Student > Master 10 17%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Student > Bachelor 2 3%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 13%
Neuroscience 8 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 12 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 17 August 2023.
All research outputs
#4,965,655
of 24,387,992 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroinflammation
#1,008
of 2,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,356
of 167,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroinflammation
#13
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,387,992 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,810 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 167,341 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 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.