MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330466487 · doi:10.1097/wco.0000000000000318

Vaccine-associated inflammatory diseases of the central nervous system

2016· review· en· W2330466487 on OpenAlexaff
Xuan‐Hung Nguyen, Abdelhadi Saoudi, Roland Liblau

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Neurology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsFreshwater Fisheries Society of BC
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationImmunologyMultiple sclerosisIntensive care medicineDiseasePublic healthEpidemiologyPopulationAutoimmune encephalitisPandemicEncephalitisVirusEnvironmental healthInfectious disease (medical specialty)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Pathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: As the most cost-effective intervention in preventive medicine and as a crucial element of any public health program, vaccination is used extensively with over 90% coverage in many countries. As approximately 5-8% of the population in developed countries suffer from an autoimmune disorder, people with an autoimmune disease are most likely to be exposed to some vaccines before or after the disease onset. In fact, a number of inflammatory disorders of the central nervous system have been associated with the administration of various vaccines. These adverse events, be they spurious associations or genuine reactions to the vaccine, may lead to difficulties in obtaining public trust in mass vaccination programs. There is, thus, an urgent need to understand whether vaccination triggers or enhances autoimmune responses. RECENT FINDINGS: By reviewing vaccine-associated inflammatory diseases of the central nervous system, this study describes the current knowledge on whether the safety signal was coincidental, as in the case of multiple sclerosis with several vaccines, or truly reflected a causal link, as in narcolepsy with cataplexy following pandemic H1N1 influenza virus vaccination. SUMMARY: The lessons learnt emphasize a central role of thorough, ideally prospective, epidemiological studies followed, if the signal is deemed plausible or real, by immunological investigations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.874

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.295 · 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.

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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in NeurologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207