MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411074047 · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e31821b1b3e

Postpartum Pharmacokinetics of Peramivir in the Treatment of 2009 H1N1 Influenza

2011· article· en· W2411074047 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick G. Clay, Raghavendra Adiga, Tracey A. H. Taylor, Rachael Alsup, Phillip M. Gerk, MaryPeace McRae

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsSKiN Health
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
KeywordsMedicinePharmacokineticsVirologyPregnancyH1N1 influenzaIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief BACKGROUND: 2009 H1N1 influenza A disproportionately affected pregnant and postpartum women compared with the general population, with higher rates of hospitalization and severe illness. We present a case of the use and pharmacokinetics of intravenous peramivir in the treatment of a patient with severe influenza. CASE: A 28-year-old woman at 37 weeks of gestation presented to the hospital with severe respiratory symptoms. 2009 H1N1 influenza reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction returned positive results and intravenous peramivir was started. She showed rapid improvement and was discharged 29 days after admission. CONCLUSION: The pharmacokinetic parameters in this patient were unexpected because the clearances occurred more quickly than in phase I trials. These differences highlight the need for additional pharmacokinetic reporting of peramivir in pregnant and postpartum women. The use of peramivir for the treatment of severe 2009 H1N1 influenza in a newly postpartum woman results in pharmacokinetic differences when compared with results of clinical trials.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207