MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209557999 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.10.035

Adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine versus quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in Hutterite Children: A randomized clinical trial

2021· article· en· W3209557999 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mark Loeb, Margaret L. Russell, Caralyn Kelly-Stradiotto, Nola Fuller, Kevin Fonseca, David J. D. Earn, Khami Chokani, Lorne A. Babiuk, Binod Neupane, Pardeep Singh, Eleanor Pullenayegum

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of CalgaryPrince Albert Grand CouncilProvincial Laboratory of Public HealthUniversity of AlbertaMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInfluenza vaccineLive attenuated influenza vaccineRandomized controlled trialHazard ratioVaccinationSeasonal influenzaVirologyVaccine efficacyCluster (spacecraft)PediatricsImmunologyInternal medicineConfidence intervalDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Children play an important role in the transmission of influenza. The best choice of vaccine to achieve both direct and indirect protection is uncertain. The objective of the study was to test whether vaccinating children with MF59 adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) can reduce influenza in children and their extended households compared to inactivated quadrivalent vaccine (QIV). METHODS: We conducted a cluster randomized trial in 42 Hutterite colonies in Alberta and Saskatchewan. Colonies were randomized such that children were assigned in a blinded manner to receive aTIV (0.25 ml of pediatric aTIV for ages 6 months to < 36 months or 0.5 ml for ages ≥ 36 months to 6 years) or 0.5 ml of QIV. Participants included 424 children aged 6 months to 6 years who received the study vaccine and 1246 family cluster members who did not receive the study vaccine. The primary outcome was confirmed influenza A and B infection using a real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. An intent to treat analysis was used. Data were collected from January 2017 to June 2019. RESULTS: The mean percentage of children who received study vaccine was 62% for aTIV colonies and 74% for QIV colonies. There were 66 (3.4%) with RT-PCR confirmed influenza A and B in the aTIV colonies (children and family clusters) versus 93 (4.4%) in the QIV colonies, hazard ratio (HR) 0.78 (95 %CI 0.36-1.71). Of these, 48 (2.5%) in the aTIV colonies and 76 (3.6%) in the QIV colonies had influenza A, HR 0.69, (95 %CI 0.29-1.66) while 18 (0.9%) and 17 (0.8%) in the aTIV versus QIV colonies respectively had influenza B, HR 1.22, (95 %CI 0.20-7.41). In children who received study vaccine, there were 5 Influenza A infections in the aTIV colonies (1.1%) compared to 30 (5.8%) in the QIV colonies, relative efficacy of 80%, HR 0.20, (95 %CI 0.06-0.66). Adverse events were significantly more common among children who received aTIV. No serious vaccine adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Vaccinating children with aTIV compared to QIV resulted in similar community RT-PCR confirmed influenza illness and led to significant protection against influenza A in children.

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)0.004
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccineSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207