Comparison of Pandemic and Seasonal Influenza in the Pediatric Emergency Department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) presentation of pediatric pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1) infection is not well characterized. Our objective was to describe the clinical manifestations of pH1N1 in the pediatric ED. We also compared these characteristics to seasonal influenza A, and explored risk factors for pH1N1 hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a pediatric hospital in Quebec City, Canada. Subjects were ED patients aged 0 to 17 years with laboratory-confirmed pH1N1 (April-July 2009) or seasonal influenza A (June 2006-March 2009). Clinical and laboratory data were analyzed by univariate and multivariate log-binomial regression. RESULTS: A total of 127 pH1N1 cases and 110 seasonal influenza cases were identified. pH1N1 patients were older (9.5 vs. 5.6 years; P < 0.0001) and presented more rapidly (2.8 vs. 3.5 days; P = 0.02). Clinical manifestations were similar, although gastrointestinal findings were less frequent in pH1N1 (relative risk [RR]: 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.65). Hospitalization risk was similar (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.81-1.55), but hospitalized pH1N1 subjects were more frequently diagnosed with pneumonia (RR: 2.41; 95% CI: 1.16-5.00). In a multivariable model, age <2 years was independently associated with pH1N1 hospitalization (RR: 3.17; 95% CI: 1.78-5.65), whereas the absence of significant comorbidities decreased its risk (RR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.31-0.85). CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for age and delay to presentation, clinical manifestations and 21-day outcomes of pediatric pH1N1 were similar to those of seasonal influenza. pH1N1 patients with previously established risk factors for severe seasonal influenza experienced increased hospitalization risk. Our results suggest that pH1N1 clinical diagnosis and management in the pediatric ED can be performed in a manner similar to seasonal influenza.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".