MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315758217 · doi:10.1097/mcp.0b013e328365af97

Narcolepsy and H1N1 vaccination

2013· review· en· W2315758217 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Simon Thebault, Angela Vincent, Paul Gringras

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarcolepsyCataplexyMedicineAutoimmunityVaccinationEpidemiologyImmunologyPediatricsAntibodyPsychiatryModafinilInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A number of European countries have reported a dramatic increase in the rates of childhood narcolepsy with cataplexy in children immunized with a split-virion adjuvanted swine flu vaccine. Here, we review the strengths and weaknesses of these epidemiological studies and possible neuroimmunological mechanisms. RECENT FINDINGS: Initial concerns of a 13-fold increased relative risk of narcolepsy were raised by the Scandinavian health protection agencies in 2010. Subsequent retrospective studies support these findings in Canada, France, Ireland, England and Denmark. The cases are predominantly young children who present with severe and rapid onset of cataplexy as well as narcolepsy often within a few weeks of vaccination. The proposed mechanism for postvaccination narcolepsy is one in which an environmental trigger causes or enhances an antibody-mediated autoimmune response in patients with a preexisting genetic susceptibility. However, there have not yet been any reports of specific autoimmunity, either antibody or T-cell-mediated. SUMMARY: There is a strong association between narcolepsy and H1N1 vaccination. However, whether this reflects a true increase in affected individuals or a hastening of disease onset in individuals who would otherwise have developed narcolepsy later will become clear in the coming years. The pathological explanation of this association and narcolepsy is likely to be autoimmune, although supportive evidence is lacking.Video abstract available: See the Video Supplementary Digital Content 1 (http://links.lww.com/COPM/A9).

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.302
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Pulmonary MedicineSame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207