VARICELLA-RELATED HOSPITALIZATIONS IN IMPACT CENTERS AFTER INTRODUCTION OF 1- AND 2-DOSE VARICELLA VACCINATION PROGRAMS BETWEEN 2000 AND 2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND The Canadian Immunization Monitoring Program ACTive (IMPACT) conducts active surveillance for varicella-related hospitalizations in 12 paediatric tertiary care centres, starting Apr 1999. OBJECTIVES This study was to determine the hospitalization trends in relation to vaccine program introduction in the provinces, between 2000 and 2015. DESIGN/METHODS Demographic data of varicella cases from the 12 IMPACT centers were analysed. The cases were subdivided into three groups (A, B and C), combining provinces with approximately the same time periods at introduction of 1-dose and 2-dose vaccination programs (see results). RESULTS The mean number of hospitalizations per year declined during the 1-dose and 2-dose eras in each group of provinces, as follows: CONCLUSION Varicella hospitalizations declined by 63–77% but reached a plateau during the 1-dose vaccine era. There was a further decline to 81–89% of baseline in the two groups which instituted 2-dose vaccine programs in 2011–12, but too early to document any further decline in Group C, the provinces which initiated 2-dose programs in 2014–16. Introduction of 2-dose programs appear to have provided further benefit, after 1-dose programs in Canada.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".