Increased reactions to pediatric influenza vaccination following concomitant pneumococcal vaccination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Influenza in children causes significant morbidity and hospitalizations and also some mortality particularly in children < 5 years of age. Influenza vaccination in children has been shown to be safe and effective, but in 2010 the pediatric influenza vaccination program was suspended in Western Australia after the rate of febrile convulsions observed (9/1000 doses) was 55 times the previously reported rate. In 2009, over 80% of all children in New Brunswick were vaccinated with an adjuvanted monovalent H1N1 vaccine shown to have very high effectiveness, raising the prospect of potential hyper-responsiveness because of residual protection. We conducted enhanced post-marketing surveillance to monitor local and general reactions. METHODS: Parents of participating children seen at dedicated vaccination clinics were given influenza vaccine survey kits to record local and general symptoms up to 3 days following receipt of season influenza vaccine. RESULTS: Febrile reactions of ≥ 38° occurred in <10% of children who received a first dose of seasonal influenza vaccine (n = 660) and severe febrile incidents with fever ≥ 39° were uncommon. Concurrent administration of other vaccine(s) including conjugated pneumococcal vaccine appeared to increase reactogenicity. No child in the study had a febrile convulsion. CONCLUSION: Influenza vaccines in children are safe, and this study provides a baseline for rapid assessment studies at the start of a vaccine season. Parents should be aware of increased fevers with concurrent vaccine administration, and antipyretics should be considered.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".