MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Thrombocytopenia after immunization of Canadian children, 1992 to 2001

2003· article· en· W2058401966 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Taj Jadavji, David W. Scheifele, Scott A. Halperin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's Hospital
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsMeaslesImmunizationComplicationVaccinationSurgeryImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Thrombocytopenia occasionally follows immunization of children, especially after administration of measles-containing vaccines. The purpose of this study was to describe the clinical features of postimmunization thrombocytopenia, with emphasis on the rate of complications and outcome. METHODS: A prospective survey was conducted by 12 pediatric centers in Canada during 1992 to 2001. At each center a nurse monitor searched for inpatient cases. Cases were defined as having onset of clinical signs or laboratory measures of thrombocytopenia (platelet count, <50 x 10(9)/l) within 30 days after immunization. Cases were described in a standardized manner, including follow-up data as available. RESULTS: Sixty-one cases were detected, an average of 6 per year or approximately 1 case per 15,000 general hospital admissions. Median age of cases was 13 months. The mean platelet count at diagnosis was 8.6 x 10(9)/l. Most cases (79%) followed measles-containing vaccines. Only 1 child had a serious (fatal) complication. Platelet counts returned to normal within 30 days of onset in 46 of 57 children (80.7%) with information available. Five children (8.2%) had persistent or intermittent thrombocytopenia for 3 months or more. CONCLUSION: Thrombocytopenia associated with routine immunization of children is rare and usually benign, resolving within 1 month in most children.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations64
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Pediatric Infectious Disease JournalSame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207