MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097373201 · doi:10.1086/657084

Inactivated Seasonal Influenza Vaccines Increase Serum Antibodies to the Neuraminidase of Pandemic Influenza A(H1N1) 2009 Virus in an Age‐Dependent Manner

2010· article· en· W2097373201 on OpenAlexafffund
Glendie Marcelin, Hilliary M. Bland, Nicholas J. Negovetich, Matthew R. Sandbulte, Ali H. Ellebedy, Ashley Webb, Yolanda Griffin, Jennifer DeBeauchamp, Janet E. McElhaney, Richard J. Webby

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchVancouver Coastal Health Research Institute
KeywordsPandemicNeuraminidaseVaccinationVirologyVirusAntibodyHemagglutinin (influenza)Human mortality from H5N1Influenza A virusImmunologyMedicineLive attenuated influenza vaccineH5N1 genetic structureImmunityBiologyDiseaseInfluenza vaccineImmune systemCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Infectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Levels of preexisting antibodies to the hemagglutinin of pandemic influenza A(H1N1) 2009 (hereafter pandemic H1N1) virus positively correlate with age. The impact of contemporary seasonal influenza vaccines on establishing immunity to other pandemic H1N1 proteins is unknown. We measured serum antibodies to the neuraminidase (NA) of pandemic H1N1 in adults prior to and after vaccination with seasonal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines. Serum antibodies to pandemic H1N1 NA were observed in all age groups; however, vaccination elevated levels of pandemic H1N1 NA antibodies predominately in elderly individuals (age, ⩾60 years). Therefore, contemporary seasonal vaccines likely contribute to reduction of pandemic H1N1-associated disease in older 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.874

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations49
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207