Development and validation of clinical prediction models to distinguish influenza from other viruses causing acute respiratory infections in children and adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predictive models have been developed for influenza but have seldom been validated. Typically they have focused on patients meeting a definition of infection that includes fever. Less is known about how models perform when more symptoms are considered. We, therefore, aimed to create and internally validate predictive scores of acute respiratory infection (ARI) symptoms to diagnose influenza virus infection as confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) from respiratory specimens. Data from a completed trial to study the indirect effect of influenza immunization in Hutterite communities were randomly split into two independent groups for model derivation and validation. We applied different multivariable modelling techniques and constructed Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves to determine predictive indexes at different cut-points. From 2008-2011, 3288 first seasonal ARI episodes and 321 (9.8%) influenza positive events occurred in 2202 individuals. In children up to 17 years, the significant predictors of influenza virus infection were fever, chills, and cough along with being of age 6 years and older. In adults, presence of chills and cough but not fever were highly specific for influenza virus infection (sensitivity 30%, specificity 96%). Performance of the models in the validation set was not significantly different. The predictors were consistently found to be significant irrespective of the multivariable technique. Symptomatic predictors of influenza virus infection vary between children and adults. The scores could assist clinicians in their test and treat decisions but the results need to be externally validated prior to application in clinical practice.
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 | 0.038 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".