MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966980798 · doi:10.1136/ebm.7.1.10

Oseltamivir was safe and effective for prophylaxis of influenza in the frail elderly

2002· article· en· W1966980798 on OpenAlexaff
Allison McGeer

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOseltamivirPopulationPlaceboInternal medicineNeuraminidase inhibitorPediatricsGynecologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(2001) J Am Geriatr Soc 49, 1025. Peters PH Jr, Gravenstein S, Norword P . , et al. . Long-term use of oseltamivir for the prophylaxis of influenza in a vaccinated frail older population. . Aug; . : . –31 . [OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] QUESTION: In frail older people in a residential setting, is oseltamivir (a neuraminidase inhibitor) safe and effective in preventing influenza A and B? Randomised (allocation concealed** placebo controlled trial with 8 weeks of follow up. 31 residential homes or sheltered accommodations for seniors in 5 countries during the 1998–99 influenza season. 572 people who were ≥ 65 years of age, resided in care homes for seniors, and scored ≥ 7 on a Mental Status Questionnaire. Exclusion criteria included antibiotic treatment for acute upper respiratory tract infection, otitis media, bronchitis, or sinusitis, and antiviral treatment for influenza in the previous 2 weeks. 548 people (mean age 81 y, 69% women), of whom 80% were vaccinated against influenza, received ≥ 1 dose of study drug and … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DJournal%2Bof%2Bthe%2BAmerican%2BGeriatrics%2BSociety%26rft.stitle%253DJ%2BAm%2BGeriatr%2BSoc%26rft.aulast%253DPeters%26rft.auinit1%253DP.%2BH.%26rft.volume%253D49%26rft.issue%253D8%26rft.spage%253D1025%26rft.epage%253D1031%26rft.atitle%253DLong-term%2Buse%2Bof%2Boseltamivir%2Bfor%2Bthe%2Bprophylaxis%2Bof%2Binfluenza%2Bin%2Ba%2Bvaccinated%2Bfrail%2Bolder%2Bpopulation.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1046%252Fj.1532-5415.2001.49204.x%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F11555062%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1046/j.1532-5415.2001.49204.x&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=11555062&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F7%2F1%2F10.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000170656700002&link_type=ISI

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Non-randomized triallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Randomized triallow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.152
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNon-randomized trial · Randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based MedicineSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207