Differences in clinical outcomes after 2009 influenza A/H1N1 and seasonal influenza among hematopoietic cell transplant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is not known whether pandemic 2009 influenza A/H1N1 (2009 H1N1) leads to more serious disease than seasonal influenza in hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients. In a retrospective study in HCT recipients with virologically proven influenza virus infection, a total of 161 HCT recipients (18 2009 H1N1, 103 seasonal influenza A, and 40 seasonal influenza B) were analyzed. In multivariable analyses, more patients with 2009 H1N1 had lower respiratory tract disease (LRD), hypoxemia, and prolonged viral shedding compared with seasonal influenza A. Seasonal influenza A and B outcomes were similar. There was no difference in overall and influenza-associated mortality among influenza virus types. Both early and delayed administration of antiviral therapy was shown to be beneficial in terms of decreased rates of development of LRD, although earlier intervention appeared to be more effective. Profound lymphopenia and lack of early antiviral therapy were associated significantly with LRD, hypoxemia, and death. High-dose corticosteroid treatment (≥ 1 mg/kg) given at the time of influenza diagnosis was associated with a reduced risk for mechanical ventilation. Thus, our data suggest that infection with 2009 influenza A/H1N1 resulted in more severe respiratory disease in HCT recipients compared with seasonal influenza.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".