Respiratory syncytial virus hospitalization and incurred morbidities the season after prophylaxis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study was to determine the incidence and incurred morbidities of Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)-related hospitalization (RSVH), the season following completion of prophylaxis. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted of all infants enrolled in a prophylaxis clinic in one institution during the 2009 to 2014 RSV seasons. RSV infection was identified by Diseases codes and confirmed by RSV-positivity. Data were classified into five groups based on indications for prophylaxis. The incidence of RSVH was calculated. For each subgroup, differences in characteristics between children with and without RSVH were analyzed by independent t test or chi-square test. RESULTS: During five RSV seasons, 827 infants were enrolled. RSVH incidence the season following prophylaxis was 2.1% (n=17/827). Children with chronic lung disease (CLD) had the highest RSVH incidence (7.7%; n=4/52) followed by preterms 33 to 35 weeks gestation (2.5%; n=4/162), those with complex medical disorders (2.2%; n=3/135), those with congenital heart disease (1.5%; n=1/66) and preterms less than or equal to 32 weeks gestation (1.2%; n=5/412). There was no statistically significant association between indications for prophylaxis and RSVH (Fisher exact test, P=0.060). The odds of RSVH were 4.9 times greater (odds ratio [OR]=4.9; 95% CI: 1.53, 15.55; P=0.007) in CLD compared to those without CLD. The median length of RSVH stay was 4 days; 58.8% (n=10/17) required oxygen (median 1 day); 29.4% (n=5/17) required intensive care. CONCLUSIONS: Infants with CLD are at highest risk for RSVH in the season postprophylaxis and may merit palivizumab for more than two seasons dependent on disease severity. However, larger prospective studies are necessary to confirm the findings before embarking on a strategy of providing prophylaxis for a third RSV season.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".