The European Forum for Clinical Management: prophylaxis against the respiratory syncytial virus in infants and young children with congenital cardiac disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A recent, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial has demonstrated the effectiveness of palivizumab (Synagis) for prophylaxis against infection by the respiratory syncytial virus in 1,287 young children with congenital cardiac disease. Guidelines for the use of palivizumab in these children considered to be at high risk were published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, followed by similar guidelines from the British Paediatric Cardiac Association, and recommendations from a number of other individual countries, including Canada, Germany, Spain, and France. In May, 2004, further discussion was held between a group of 15 paediatric cardiologists at a European forum for clinical management held in Munich, Germany. The objective of this forum was to define optimal recommendations on prevention of infection by the respiratory syncytial virus in infants and young children with congenital cardiac disease, appropriate to the clinical needs and style of those practising in paediatrics in individual countries. Participants were invited because of their knowledge of the therapeutic area, and for their experience of using palivizumab for prophylaxis against the respiratory syncytial virus in children with congenitally malformed hearts. Measures to educate the carers of children with such congenital malformations on precautions against infection by the respiratory syncytial virus were discussed, along with the many different aspects of best practice for therapeutic prophylaxis with palivizumab. The most appropriate timing of prophylaxis, recommendations for which children are most likely to benefit from prophylaxis, and suggested protocols were among the issues covered. The recommendations resulting from the discussions are presented in this paper, as a step towards reaching consensus.
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 | 0.020 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".