MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124693754 · doi:10.1345/aph.1p078

Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following H1N1 Immunization in a Pediatric Patient

2010· article· en· W2124693754 on OpenAlexaff
Marie‐Ève Tremblay, Aurélie Closon, Guy D’Anjou, Jean‐François Bussières

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Pharmacotherapy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsGuillain-Barre syndromeSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To report a case of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) following a dose of influenza A (H1N1) vaccine (Arepanrix). CASE SUMMARY: An 11-year-old boy was admitted to the hospital after presenting with facial diplegia; abdominal, forehead, and thigh pain; and acute cervical pain. He had received the Arepanrix H1N1 subcutaneous vaccine 13 days before symptom onset. The neurologic examination also revealed a symmetric bilateral paralysis of the VIIth cranial nerve and intense pain, proximal weakness of the shoulder girdles and pelvis, and preserved deep tendon reflexes. Cerebrospinal fluid analysis revealed an albuminocytologic dissociation. Therefore, a diagnosis of atypical GBS following vaccination against HINI influenza was made. DISCUSSION: Based on the clinical evaluation, laboratory test results, neurologic features, and the exclusion of alternative diagnoses, the Naranjo probability scale revealed a probable relationship between the clinical manifestations of GBS and the vaccine against influenza A (H1N1) received by the patient. This is the first published case for the 2009 influenza pandemic in children. CONCLUSIONS: While recent studies have found inconclusive results on the association between influenza vaccine and GBS, all suspected cases should be published for further evaluation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of PharmacotherapySame topicPeripheral Neuropathies and DisordersFrench-language works237,207