RESPIRATORY ILLNESS AND RESPIRATORY SYNCYTIAL VIRUS (RSV)-RELATED HOSPITALIZATION (RSVH) IN INFANTS WITH CONGENITAL AIRWAY ANOMALIES (CAA) IN THE CARESS REGISTRY (2005-2015)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: RSV is the primary cause of lower respiratory tract viral infections in children <2 years of age. Infants with congenital airway anomalies (CAA) may experience increased risk of respiratory illness-related hospitalization (RIH) and RSV-related hospitalization (RSVH). The Canadian RSV Evaluation Study of Palivizumab (CARESS) tracks outcomes following palivizumab prophylaxis in high-risk infants. OBJECTIVES: We compared the hazard for RIH and RSVH in infants with CAA versus those prophylaxed with palivizumab for other serious underlying medical disorders (MD) or for standard indications (SD). DESIGN/METHODS: Data was assembled from the CARESS registry, a prospective, observational, cohort study of children who received ≥1 injection of palivizumab across 32 Canadian hospital sites. Neonatal and demographic data were collected upon enrolment. Post-injection telephone surveys were conducted monthly to assess palivizumab utilization and adherence, including outcomes related to respiratory infection events. RESULTS: 21,436 infants were enrolled (850 CAA, 2982 MD, and 17,604 SD). Statically significant demographic differences (p<0.05) across groups were found in: enrolment and gestational age, birth and enrolment weight, as well as proportions of Caucasians, daycare attendance, exposure to smoking, siblings, multiple birth status, household crowding, and family history of atopy. Overall palivizumab adherence with inter-dose intervals was 72.3% and was similar across indications. 1501 infants were hospitalized a total of 1800 times. CAA infants had a RIH rate of 11.6% (MD [10.1%], SD [6.3%]) with a significantly increased hazard compared to MD (HR = 1.41, 95%CI 1.14-1.75, p=0.002) and SD (HR = 1.22, 95%CI 1.06-1.39, p=0.005). Crude RSVH rates were: 1.65% (CAA) versus 1.58% (MD), 1.34% (SD). By Cox proportional hazard analysis, CAA infants had similar RSVH hazard versus MD or SD infants (χ2=0.65, df=2, p=0.72). After adjusting for daycare attendance, siblings, smoking exposure, crowding, and atopy, the model was significant (χ2=66.5, df=5, p<0.0005); however, based on indications for palivizumab the model was found to be insignificant (p=0.92). CONCLUSION: CAA infants experienced increased RIH risk relative to MD and SD infants. However, hazard for RSVH appeared to be similar across indications which may be due to the smaller CAA sample size compared to MD and SD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".