Analysis for H1N1 virus antibody levels in general population in Wuhan area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To estimate the infection status of H1N1 virus in general population in Wuhan and provide information to predict future epidemics,we investigated H1N1 virus antibody levels in Wuhan during the 4th quarter in 2009 to the 1st quarter in 2010.METHODS We collected 2 106 sera for 4 age groups in 6 consecutive months.Hemagglutination inhibition tests were used to determine the level of antibody for H1N1 virus.RESULTS 2 106 persons were included in this investigation.The total positive rate was 18.14%;17.00% and 19.48% for males and females,respectively.There were significant differences of antibody levels across collecting time periods,age groups and H1N1 vaccine history(P﹤0.05).CONCLUSION The average proportions of antibody for H1N1 virus in general population in Wuhan during the 4th quarter in 2009 to the 1st with quarter in 2010 were above 18%,which is still low.Compared with people do not receive vaccination,people received H1N1 vaccination have significantly increased levels of antibody,which indicates the protective effect of H1N1 vaccine.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".