Incidence of Hospitalizations and Emergency Department Visits for Herpes Zoster in Immunocompromised and Immunocompetent Adults in Ontario, Canada, 2002–2016
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised adults are at .increased risk of herpes zoster (HZ) infection and related complications. We aimed to assess the incidence of hospital-attended HZ (ie, seen in hospital or emergency department) in immunocompromised populations and compare it to immunocompetent populations. METHODS: We calculated incidence rates (IRs) of hospital-attended HZ in Ontario, Canada, between 1 April 2002 and 31 August 2016 in adults ≥18 years of age categorized as immunocompromised or immunocompetent. We repeated these analyses by type of immunocompromising condition and provided incidence rate ratios (IRRs) comparing to immunocompetent adults. We also calculated IRs and IRRs of HZ complications by immunocompromised status. RESULTS: There were 135 206 incident cases of hospital-attended HZ during the study period. Immunocompromised adults accounted for 13% of these cases despite representing 3% of the population. The risk of hospital-attended HZ was higher for immunocompromised adults compared with immunocompetent adults (IRR, 2.9 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.9-3.0]) and ranged across type of immunocompromising conditions, from 2.6 (95% CI, 2.6-2.7) in those with a solid tumor malignancy to 12.3 (95% CI, 11.3-13.2) in those who had undergone hematopoietic stem cell transplant. The risk of any HZ complication was higher in immunocompromised adults (IRR, 3.6 [95% CI, 3.5-3.7]) and highest for disseminated zoster (IRR, 32.8 [95% CI, 27.8-38.6]). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of hospital-attended HZ and related complications was higher in immunocompromised populations compared with immunocompetent populations. Our findings underscore the high-risk nature of this population and the potential benefits that may be realized through HZ vaccination.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".