MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155995435 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2011.300606

H1N1 Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy and Fetal and Neonatal Outcomes

2012· article· en· W2155995435 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Deshayne B. Fell, Ann E. Sprague, Ning Liu, Abdool S. Yasseen, Shi Wu Wen, Graeme N. Smith, Mark Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitut pour la Recherche en Santé PubliquePublic Health Agency
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationPregnancyObstetricsConfidence intervalGestationGestational agePopulationSmall for gestational ageRelative riskFetusPandemicApgar scorePediatricsImmunologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Internal medicineDiseaseEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the relationship between maternal H1N1 vaccination and fetal and neonatal outcomes among singleton births during the 2009-2010 H1N1 pandemic. METHODS: We used a population-based perinatal database in Ontario, Canada, to examine preterm birth (PTB), small-for-gestational-age (SGA) births, 5-minute Apgar score below 7, and fetal death via multivariable regression. We compared outcomes between women who did and did not receive an H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy. RESULTS: Of the 55,570 mothers with a singleton birth, 23,340 (42.0%) received an H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy. Vaccinated mothers were less likely to have an SGA infant based on the 10th (adjusted risk ratio [RR]=0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.85, 0.96) and 3rd (adjusted RR=0.81; 95% CI=0.72, 0.92) growth percentiles; PTB at less than 32 weeks' gestation (adjusted RR=0.73; 95% CI=0.58, 0.91) and fetal death (adjusted RR=0.66; 95% CI=0.47, 0.91) were also less likely among these women. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that second- or third-trimester H1N1 vaccination was associated with improved fetal and neonatal outcomes during the recent pandemic. Our findings need to be confirmed in future studies with designs that can better overcome concerns regarding biased estimates of vaccine efficacy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 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

Citations138
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207