MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890904631 · doi:10.14745/ccdr.v44i09a07

Updated NACI recommendation for measles post-exposure prophylaxis

2018· article· en· W2890904631 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
MC Tunis, MI Salvadori, Vinita Dubey, O Baclic

Bibliographic record

VenueCanada Communicable Disease Report · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVirology and Viral Diseases
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionAssociation of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease CanadaPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMeaslesMedicineRubellaImmunizationVaccinationPediatricsImmunologyImmunityAntibodyMeasles virusImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Human immune globulin (Ig) products are currently recommended as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for measles in certain susceptible groups. However, successful measles vaccination programs in North America have led to low circulation of measles virus and most blood donors now have vaccine-derived immunity. Concurrently, the concentrations of anti-measles antibodies in human Ig products have shown trends of gradual decline and previously recommended doses and routes of administration may no longer be optimally protective. OBJECTIVES: To review the literature and update recommendations on post-exposure prophylaxis for measles, including dosing and route of administration, for measles Ig PEP in susceptible infants and in individuals who are immunocompromised or pregnant, in order to prevent severe disease. APPROACH: The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Varicella Working Group reviewed key literature, international practices, and product information for current Ig products pertaining to the optimal dosage and routes of Ig administration for measles PEP. It then proposed evidence-based changes to the PEP recommendations that were considered and approved by NACI. RESULTS: NACI continues to recommend that susceptible immunocompetent individuals six months of age and older, who are exposed to measles and who have no contraindications be given measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine within 72 hours of the exposure. NACI recommends that for susceptible infants younger than six months of age, if injection volume is not a major concern, intramuscular immunoglobulin (IMIg) should be provided at a concentration of 0.5 mL/kg, to a maximum dose of 15 mL administered over multiple injection sites. Susceptible infants six to 12 months old who are identified after 72 hours and within six days of measles exposure should receive IMIg (0.5 mL/kg) if injection volume is not a major concern. For susceptible contacts who are pregnant or immunocompromised, if injection volume is not a concern, IMIg can be provided at a concentration of 0.5 mL/kg understanding that recipients 30 kg or more will not receive the measles antibody concentrations that are considered to be fully protective. Alternatively, in cases where injection volume is a major concern or for recipients 30 kg or more, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) can be provided at a dose of 400 mg/kg.NACI does not recommend that susceptible immunocompetent individuals older than 12 months of age receive Ig PEP for measles exposure due to the low risk of disease complications and the practical challenges of administration for case and contact management. CONCLUSION: NACI has updated the recommendations for measles PEP to reflect current evidence and best practices in order to prevent severe disease in Canada. Consistent with recommendations in other countries, this includes consideration of off-label use of IVIg in some instances.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.012

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanada Communicable Disease ReportSame topicVirology and Viral DiseasesFrench-language works237,207