Pandemic Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 in the English- and Dutch-speaking Caribbean: An Epidemiological Overview
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe epidemiological trends of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) in the English and Dutch-speaking Caribbean during the pandemic period. DESIGN AND METHODS: Data on laboratory-confirmed cases and deaths associated with pandemic influenza A (H1N1) contained in two regional databases at the Caribbean Epidemiology Centre (CAREC) were analysed. The data sources were epidemiological and laboratory reports from English and Dutch-speaking countries and the CAREC laboratory information system (LABIS). RESULTS: In the English- and Dutch-speaking Caribbean, pandemic influenza A (H1N1) was the predominant circulating influenza virus type during the pandemic period. There were three distinct phases: a first pandemic wave during mid-April to end of August 2009 (734 cases), a second pandemic wave during September-December 2009 (570 cases) and a phase of low transmission during January to mid-August 2010 (55 cases). The majority of cases (76%) were aged less than 30 years, with children of school age being most affected. Most cases (89%) presented with symptoms of the respiratory tract and smaller proportions (20-40%) presented with gastrointestinal and other symptoms. No cases tested were resistant to oseltamivir. A quarter of cases required hospitalization and the case fatality rate was 1.8%. CONCLUSIONS: The epidemiological characteristics of the pandemic in the English- and Dutch-speaking Caribbean were consistent with that in other parts of the world. It is important that post pandemic surveillance (epidemiological and virological) for respiratory illnesses continues to be enhanced in order to give a better understanding of seasonality and changing trends in respiratory illnesses and their aetiologic agents.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".