MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921331215 · doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2019.02.009

Randomized controlled trial of influenza vaccine in patients with heart failure to reduce adverse vascular events (IVVE): Rationale and design

2019· article· en· W2921331215 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Loeb, Hisham Dokainish, Antonio Dans, Lia M. Palileo‐Villanueva, Ambuj Roy, Kamilu M. Karaye, Jun Zhu, Yan Liang, Fastone Goma, Albertino Damasceno, Khalid F. AlHabib, Gerald Yonga, Charles Mondo, Wael Almahmeed, Arif Al Mulla, Salim Yusuf

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Heart Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsImpactPopulation Health Research InstituteMcMaster University
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialObservational studyAdverse effectHeart failureVaccinationInternal medicineIntensive care medicineCardiologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Influenza is associated with an increase in the risk of cardiac and other vascular events. Observational data and small randomized trials suggest that influenza vaccination may reduce such adverse vascular events. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial patients with heart failure are randomized to receive either inactivated influenza vaccine or placebo annually for 3 years. Patients aged ≥18 years with a clinical diagnosis of heart failure and NYHA functional class II, III and IV are eligible. Five thousand patients from 10 countries where influenza vaccination is not common (Asia, the Middle East, and Africa) have been enrolled. The primary outcome is a composite of the following: cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke and hospitalizations for heart failure using standardized criteria. Analyses will be based on comparing event rates between influenza vaccine and control groups and will include time to event, rate comparisons using Poisson methods, and logistic regression. The analysis will be conducted by intention to treat i.e. patients will be analyzed in the group in which they were assigned. Multivariable secondary analyses to assess whether variables such as age, sex, seasonality modify the benefits of vaccination are also planned for the primary outcome. CONCLUSION: This is the largest randomized trial to test if influenza vaccine compared to control reduces adverse vascular events in high risk individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.govNCT02762851.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations46
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Heart JournalSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207