Inpatient outcomes for hospitalized older adults with rhinovirus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background Rhinoviruses account for many cases of the “common cold” and infection is often self-limiting. As such, there is a lack of data regarding the inpatient outcomes of individuals hospitalized with rhinovirus infection. Given the generalized poorer prognosis of elderly admitted with respiratory viral infections, we assessed the mortality rate of general medical patients admitted with rhinovirus infection along with the major risk factors associated to mortality. Methods We performed a retrospective chart review of patients admitted to our clinical teaching ward from December 2013 to June 2017. Results Overall, 12.5% of patients admitted with rhinovirus infection died within 90 days of admission. The median age of admitted patients was 70 years-old. In univariable analysis, age (OR 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.09) and the need for oxygen at presentation (OR 3.23; 95% CI 1.06-9.86) were associated with death while obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma (OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.01-0.81) was associated with survival. In the multivariable model, age (aOR 1.04; 95% CI 1.00-1.09) and obstructive lung disease (aOR 0.09 95%CI 0.01-0.73) remained significant whereas the requirement for oxygen at presentation did not (aOR 2.78; 95% CI 0.84-9.23). Conclusion Our study reveals that rhinovirus is an important cause of both morbidity and mortality in the elderly and further highlights the need for studies of potentially effective treatment options. In the meantime, we suggest that rigorous respiratory hygiene measures and quality older adult care should be practiced when caring for at-risk adults.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".