Antiviral Strategies for Emerging Influenza Viruses in Remote Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to the lack of timely access to resources for critical care, strategic use of antiviral drugs is crucial for mitigating the impact of novel influenza viruses with pandemic potential in remote and isolated communities. We sought to evaluate the effect of antiviral treatment and prophylaxis of close contacts in a Canadian remote northern community. METHODS: We used an agent-based, discrete-time simulation model for disease spread in a remote community, which was developed as an in-silico population using population census data. Relative and cumulative age-specific attack rates, and the total number of infections in simulated model scenarios were obtained. RESULTS: We found that early initiation of antiviral treatment is more critical for lowering attack rates in a remote setting with a low population-average age compared to an urban population. Our results show that a significant reduction in the relative, age-specific attack rates due to increasing treatment coverage does not necessarily translate to a significant reduction in the overall arrack rate. When treatment coverage varies from low to moderate, targeted prophylaxis has a very limited impact in reducing attack rates and should be offered at a low level (below 10%) to avoid excessive waste of drugs. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to previous work, for conservative treatment coverages, our results do not provide any convincing evidence for the implementation of targeted prophylaxis. The findings suggest that public health strategies in remote communities should focus on the wider availability (higher coverage) and timely distribution of antiviral drugs for treatment of clinically ill individuals.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".