MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110915832 · doi:10.3201/eid1805.111596

No Association between 2008–09 Influenza Vaccine and Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 Virus Infection, Manitoba, Canada, 2009

2012· article· en· W2110915832 on OpenAlexaffabout
Salaheddin M. Mahmud, Paul Van Caeseele, Gregory Hammond, Carol Kurbis, Tim Hilderman, Lawrence Elliott

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging infectious diseases · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsManitoba HealthWinnipeg Regional Health AuthorityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirusMedicineVirologyPandemicInfluenza A virusOdds ratioInfluenza-like illnessPopulationHuman mortality from H5N1Influenza vaccineImmunizationImmunologyInternal medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthAntibodyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conducted a population-based study in Manitoba, Canada, to investigate whether use of inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) during the 2008-09 influenza season was associated with subsequent infection with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus during the first wave of the 2009 pandemic. Data were obtained from a provincewide population-based immunization registry and laboratory-based influenza surveillance system. The test-negative case-control study included 831 case-patients with confirmed influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection and 2,479 controls, participants with test results negative for influenza A and B viruses. For the association of TIV receipt with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection, the fully adjusted odds ratio was 1.0 (95% CI 0.7-1.4). Among case-patients, receipt of 2008-09 TIV was associated with a statistically nonsignificant 49% reduction in risk for hospitalization. In agreement with study findings outside Canada, our study in Manitoba indicates that the 2008-09 TIV neither increased nor decreased the risk for infection with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.290 · 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.

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

Citations19
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerging infectious diseasesSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207