MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594017138 · doi:10.1080/21645515.2017.1287641

Viral interference and the live-attenuated intranasal influenza vaccine: Results from a pediatric cohort with cystic fibrosis

2017· article· en· W2594017138 on OpenAlexaff
Constantina Boikos, Jesse Papenburg, Christine Martineau, Lawrence Joseph, David W. Scheifele, Mark Chilvers, Larry C. Lands, Gaston De Serres, Caroline Quach

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreCystic Fibrosis CanadaChild and Family Research InstituteInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecMontreal Children's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationInfluenza vaccineCystic fibrosisLive attenuated influenza vaccineVirusNasal administrationImmunologyVirologyInfluenza A virusInfluenza-like illnessInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to explore the effects of viral co-detection in individuals recently vaccinated with the live-attenuated intranasal influenza virus vaccine (LAIV) on the detection of influenza RNA. METHODS: Before the 2013-2014 influenza season, nasal swabs were obtained from 59 pediatric participants with cystic fibrosis (CF) and 17 of their healthy siblings immediately before vaccination and 4 times during the week of follow-up. Real-time RT-PCR assays were used to detect influenza RNA. Co-detection of a non-influenza respiratory virus (NIRV) at the time of vaccination was determined by a multiplex RT-PCR assay. Differences in the proportions and rates of influenza detection and their 95% credible intervals (CrI) were estimated. RESULTS: Influenza RNA was detected in 16% fewer participants (95% CrI: -7, 39%) throughout follow-up in the NIRV-positive group compared with the NIRV-negative group (59% vs. 75%). This was also observed in participants with CF alone (66% vs. 74%; RD = 8% 95% CrI: -16, 33%) as well as in healthy participants only (75% vs. 30%; RD = 45%, 95% CrI: -2, 81%). Influenza was detected in NIRV-negative subjects for 0.49 d more compared with NIRV-positive subjects (95% CrI: -0.37, 1.26). CONCLUSION: The observed proportion of subjects in whom influenza RNA was detected and the duration of detection differed slightly between NIRV- positive and -negative subjects. However, wide credible intervals for the difference preclude definitive conclusions. If true, this observed association may be related to a recent viral respiratory infection, a phenomenon known as viral interference.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Vaccines & ImmunotherapeuticsSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207