MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2946917280 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxz066.041

42 A risk factor approach is highly effective at selecting 29-34w gestation infants at risk for first season RSV-related admissions – a population study

2019· article· en· W2946917280 on OpenAlexaff
Sophia Sidi, Jennifer Claydon, Alfonso Solimano, Richard Taylor, Pascal M. Lavoie, Cheryl Christopherson, Boris Kuzeljevic, Soren Gantt, Manish Sadarangani, Grace L. Burns, Laurence Bayzand

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreBC Children's HospitalChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalivizumabMedicinePediatricsBreastfeedingPopulationBronchopulmonary dysplasiaGestational ageAttendanceRisk factorDiagnosis codeSeason of birthPregnancyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthRespiratory system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RSV palivizumab prophylaxis remains controversial in infants 29-34w GA without bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). In our RSV Program these infants only qualify if they cumulate risk factors (e.g. # siblings, breastfeeding, smoking at home, daycare attendance, etc.; for risk score>42 pts) and their date of discharge is after Oct01. This risk score was developed from the literature (including FLIP and PICNIC studies) and has been in use since 2013. We track all seasonal RSV=related admissions in infants ≤24 months. To compare RSV-related hospitalizations between infants who exceeded the risk threshold versus those who did not, across 4 RSV seasons. The RSV season runs from Nov01 to Apr30, so by definition all first season infants are <6mo age at the start of the RSV season. All ages were defined at the start of RSV season: Group 1: infants 29-34w, age ≤2 months with a risk score >42 pts; Group 2: infants 29-34w, age ≤2 months with a risk score ≤42 pts; Group 3: infants 29-34w, age 2–6 months with a risk score ≤42 pts. RSV-related admissions were obtained by linking 3 databases: Discharge Abstract Database using 7 RSV-related ICD-10 diagnostic codes, Perinatal Services regional Perinatal Data Registry (to establish the gestational age of infants), and RSV Program database. Only 355/2652 (13.3%) of infants 29-34w were admitted into the Program. Despite prophylaxis, Group 1 infants had higher RSV-related hospitalization rates than infants in Group 2. In subgroup analysis, infants born 29-32w were at increased risk in Groups 1 and 3, whereas infants 29-32w in Group 2 were not at increased risk, compared to infants 33–34 weeks (by 95% confidence intervals – not shown). Table shows proportions of RSV-related admissions with p-values defined between groups. The regional risk score safely and effectively selects the 13% of 29 to 34w infants ≤2mo with a high risk of RSV-related hospitalizations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.325 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research→French-language works237,207→