↓ Skip to main content

ProQuest

Zika Virus: Medical Countermeasure Development Challenges

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
194 X users
patent
14 patents
facebook
6 Facebook pages
wikipedia
9 Wikipedia pages
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
161 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
516 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Zika Virus: Medical Countermeasure Development Challenges
Published in
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, March 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004530
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert W. Malone, Jane Homan, Michael V. Callahan, Jill Glasspool-Malone, Lambodhar Damodaran, Adriano De Bernardi Schneider, Rebecca Zimler, James Talton, Ronald R. Cobb, Ivan Ruzic, Julie Smith-Gagen, Daniel Janies, James Wilson, Zika Response Working Group

Abstract

Reports of high rates of primary microcephaly and Guillain-Barré syndrome associated with Zika virus infection in French Polynesia and Brazil have raised concerns that the virus circulating in these regions is a rapidly developing neuropathic, teratogenic, emerging infectious public health threat. There are no licensed medical countermeasures (vaccines, therapies or preventive drugs) available for Zika virus infection and disease. The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) predicts that Zika virus will continue to spread and eventually reach all countries and territories in the Americas with endemic Aedes mosquitoes. This paper reviews the status of the Zika virus outbreak, including medical countermeasure options, with a focus on how the epidemiology, insect vectors, neuropathology, virology and immunology inform options and strategies available for medical countermeasure development and deployment. Multiple information sources were employed to support the review. These included publically available literature, patents, official communications, English and Lusophone lay press. Online surveys were distributed to physicians in the US, Mexico and Argentina and responses analyzed. Computational epitope analysis as well as infectious disease outbreak modeling and forecasting were implemented. Field observations in Brazil were compiled and interviews conducted with public health officials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 194 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 516 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 5 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Colombia 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 499 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 111 22%
Student > Bachelor 94 18%
Researcher 66 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 33 6%
Other 107 21%
Unknown 58 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 109 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 88 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 67 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 26 5%
Other 116 22%
Unknown 81 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 168. 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 09 January 2024.
All research outputs
#240,541
of 25,388,837 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
#111
of 9,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,271
of 312,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
#8
of 232 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,388,837 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,370 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 312,390 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 232 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.