MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321028638 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofu052.664

956Management of a respiratory outbreak due to concomitantly circulating influenza A and parainfluenza 1 in a residential care facility

2014· article· en· W2321028638 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher F. Lowe, Victor C. M. Leung, Ted Pincock, Mazen Badawi, Réka Gustafson, Elisa Lloyd‐Smith, Marc G. Romney

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal HealthUniversity of British ColumbiaProvidence Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOutbreakVirologyRespiratory systemEmergency medicineRespiratory careIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Respiratory viruses are common causes of outbreaks in residential care. Multiplex PCR assays for respiratory viruses enable the detection of multiple viruses, though the clinical significance of dual infections is unclear. We describe an outbreak of 2 respiratory viruses co-circulating in a residential care facility in Vancouver, Canada. Methods. Outbreak investigation was conducted in a facility with 216 residents distributed among 3 separate units in January 2014. Cases were defined as any resident or staff with acute onset respiratory illness [fever (>38.0°C) and cough], and with at least one of the following: sore throat, nasal congestion, malaise, chills, muscle aches, headache or change in mental status. Affected patients were placed on contact and droplet precautions. Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected on symptomatic residents and tested using an in-house multiplex PCR assay (influenza A/B, respiratory syncytial virus, parainfluenza 1/2/3, adenovirus and human metapneumovirus). An epidemic curve of the outbreak was created. Results. The outbreak persisted for 13 days. Twelve patients were infected, including 7 with parainfluenza 1, 2 with influenza A and 3 with parainfluenza 1/influenza A co-infection (figure). All patients manifesting respiratory symptoms were tested (12/28, 43%), rather than empirically treating subsequent patients meeting case definition. Treatment with oseltamivir was provided for 5 patients positive for influenza A, with all others receiving prophylaxis. Two staff developed upper respiratory tract symptoms and were considered cases. Outbreak management also included cessation of group activities, closure to admissions and enhanced unit cleaning. Influenza vaccination rates were 94% for residents and 83% for healthcare workers. Conclusion. Routine testing using a multiplex PCR assay detected a respiratory outbreak involving single and co-infections. Two circulating viruses can affect outbreak management. In this outbreak, all symptomatic residents were tested and confirmed rather than empirically treated. In addition to accurate classification and management of cases, overall consumption of oseltamivir prophylaxis can be reduced by monitoring for the persistence of both viruses. Disclosures. All authors: No reported disclosures.

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)0.001
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicRespiratory viral infections researchFrench-language works237,207