Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The 2009 pandemic HIN1 influenza strain (H1N12009) produced more severe disease and increased risk for mortality. As an at-risk population for more severe influenza illness, particular concern regarding HIV patients triggered a focused effort to evaluate disease burden and vaccine efficacy in these populations. RECENT FINDINGS: As with other immune-compromised individuals, most HIV-infected individuals recovered without major consequence. Although HIV infection was assumed to be a risk factor for more severe disease and death, the published literature does not indicate this to be so. Neuraminadase inhibitors were well tolerated by this population and there was no evidence of clinically significant pharmacokinetic interactions with antiretroviral therapy. Immunogenicity was increased with H1N12009 vaccine compared to the historical results of nonpandemic vaccines and optimized by the use of adjuvants. Booster dosing was also of benefit. H1N12009 vaccine was generally well tolerated without evidence of detrimental effect on HIV status. SUMMARY: The worse case scenario was not realized for H1N12009 in the general population or in those with HIV. Immunization with adjuvant represents a key measure to protect this population from H1N12009 and other future novel influenza strains.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".