Risk of Anterior Segment Complications Associated With the Live Herpes Zoster Vaccine: Evidence From a Health-Claim Database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the risk of developing anterior segment complications after receiving the live herpes zoster virus vaccine. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included a random sample of 9 million patients registered in a health-claim database in the United States between 2006 and 2016. Herpes zoster-related anterior segment diseases were identified by International Classification of Diseases ninth or tenth edition codes (an event). Patients without any event before index dates were separated into cohorts 1 and 2. Cohort 1 received the live virus vaccine on the index date. Cohort 2 was diagnosed with nonophthalmic zoster on the index date. The recurrent cohorts consisted of those who had an event 6 months or more before the index dates and were separated into cohort 3 and cohort 4 based on the same criteria as cohort 1 and 2, respectively. All cohorts were followed to the first event. Hazard ratios (HRs) of anterior segment complications after vaccine administration were determined. RESULTS: There were 72,141 vaccine users and 133,604 nonusers. There were 379 events and 1032 events in cohort 1 and cohort 2, respectively. The adjusted HR was 0.89 (95% confidence interval: 0.77-1.02). Among those with recurrent disease, there were 2679 vaccine users and 9421 nonusers. There were 16 events in cohort 3, compared with 86 events in cohort 4. The adjusted HR was 0.70 (95% confidence interval: 0.40-1.23). CONCLUSIONS: Data from a large health-claim database suggest that the live zoster virus vaccine is not associated with a higher risk of anterior segment complications.
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 | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".