MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1994471716 · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-8-59

Comparing estimates of influenza-associated hospitalization and death among adults with congestive heart failure based on how influenza season is defined

2008· article· en· W1994471716 on OpenAlexaff
Carolyn Sandoval, Stephen D. Walter, Paul Krueger, Mark Loeb

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsMedicineBiostatisticsHeart failureEpidemiologyInternal medicinePublic healthEmergency medicineInfluenza seasonCardiologyIntensive care medicineVirologyPathologyVaccinationInfluenza vaccine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is little consensus about how the influenza season should be defined in studies that assess influenza-attributable risk. The objective of this study was to compare estimates of influenza-associated risk in a defined clinical population using four different methods of defining the influenza season. METHODS: Using the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD) clinical database and national influenza surveillance data from 1986-87 to 1990-91, four definitions were used to assess influenza-associated risk: (a) three-week moving average of positive influenza isolates is at least 5%, (b) three-week moving average of positive influenza isolates is at least 10%, (c) first and last positive influenza isolate are identified, and (d) 5% of total number of positive isolates for the season are obtained. The clinical data were from adults aged 21 to 80 with physician-diagnosed congestive heart failure. All-cause hospitalization and all-cause mortality during the influenza seasons and non-influenza seasons were compared using four definitions of the influenza season. Incidence analyses and Cox regression were used to assess the effect of exposure to influenza season on all-cause hospitalization and death using all four definitions. RESULTS: There was a higher risk of hospitalization associated with the influenza season, regardless of how the start and stop of the influenza season was defined. The adjusted risk of hospitalization was 8 to 10 percent higher during the influenza season compared to the non-influenza season when the different definitions were used. However, exposure to influenza was not consistently associated with higher risk of death when all definitions were used. When the 5% moving average and first/last positive isolate definitions were used, exposure to influenza was associated with a higher risk of death compared to non-exposure in this clinical population (adjusted hazard ratios [HR], 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.29 and adjusted HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.33, respectively). CONCLUSION: Estimates of influenza-attributable risk may vary depending on how influenza season is defined and the outcome being assessed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations15
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicInfluenza Virus Research Studies→French-language works237,207→