Influenza vaccines provide diminished protection but are cost‐saving in older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deans GD, Stiver HG, McElhaney JE (University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada). Influenza vaccines provide diminished protection but are cost‐saving in older adults (Foresight). J Intern Med 2010; 267: 220–227. Abstract. Influenza is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality in adults aged over 65 years. Although vaccination remains the most effective method of preventing influenza and its sequellae, current vaccination strategies provide less protection to older adults than to younger persons. Influenza vaccination in community‐dwelling older adults is cost‐effective, though there is room for improvement. Newer vaccine strategies considered for use in older adults include alternate routes of administration (intradermal or intranasal), addition of adjuvant, and novel methods of antigen presentation. Measuring cell‐mediated immune response to new vaccines in addition to antibody response may correlate better with vaccine efficacy in this population. Whilst pandemic influenza A/H1N1 2009 (pH1N1) has largely spared older adults, the impact of pH1N1 vaccination has yet to be determined.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".