MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896183842 · doi:10.2196/11333

Estimating Vaccine Effectiveness Against Hospitalized Influenza During Pregnancy: Multicountry Protocol for a Retrospective Cohort Study

2018· article· en· W2896183842 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Allison L. Naleway, Sarah Ball, Jeffrey C. Kwong, Brandy E Wyant, Mark A. Katz, Annette K. Regan, Margaret L. Russell, Nicola P. Klein, Hannah Chung, Kimberley Simmonds, Eduardo Azziz‐Baumgartner, Becca Feldman, Avram Levy, Deshayne B. Fell, Steven J. Drews, Shikha Garg, Paul V. Effler, Noam Barda, Stephanie A. Irving, Patricia Shifflett, Michael L. Jackson, Mark G. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of AlbertaAlberta HealthUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyProtocol (science)PregnancyCohort studyCohortEnvironmental healthObstetricsFamily medicineInternal medicineAlternative medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although pregnant women are believed to have elevated risks of severe influenza infection and are targeted for influenza vaccination, no study to date has examined influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations during pregnancy, primarily because this outcome poses many methodological challenges. OBJECTIVE: The Pregnancy Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (PREVENT) was formed in 2016 as an international collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Abt Associates; and study sites in Australia, Canada, Israel, and the United States. The primary goal of this collaboration is to estimate IVE in preventing acute respiratory or febrile illness (ARFI) hospitalizations associated with laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection during pregnancy. Secondary aims include (1) describing the incidence, clinical course, and severity of influenza-associated ARFI hospitalization during pregnancy; (2) comparing the characteristics of ARFI-hospitalized pregnant women who were tested for influenza with those who were not tested; (3) describing influenza vaccination coverage in pregnant women; and (4) comparing birth outcomes among women with laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalization versus other noninfluenza ARFI hospitalizations. METHODS: For an initial assessment of IVE, sites identified a retrospective cohort of pregnant women aged from 18 to 50 years whose pregnancies overlapped with local influenza seasons from 2010 to 2016. Pregnancies were defined as those that ended in a live birth or stillbirth of at least 20 weeks gestation. The analytic sample for the primary IVE analysis was restricted to pregnant women who were hospitalized for ARFI during site-specific influenza seasons and clinically tested for influenza virus infection using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: We identified approximately 2 million women whose pregnancies overlapped with influenza seasons; 550,344 had at least one hospitalization during this time. After restricting to women who were hospitalized for ARFI and tested for influenza, the IVE analytic sample included 1005 women. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to addressing the primary question about the effectiveness of influenza vaccination, PREVENT data will address other important knowledge gaps including understanding the incidence, clinical course, and severity of influenza-related hospitalizations during pregnancy. The data infrastructure and international partnerships created for these analyses may be useful and informative for future influenza studies. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/11333.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.216
GPT teacher head0.582
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207