Respiratory Viruses in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solid organ transplantation is often lifesaving, but does carry an increased risk of infection. Respiratory viral infections are one of the most prevalent infections, and are a cause of significant morbidity and mortality, especially among lung transplant recipients. There is also data to suggest an association with acute rejection and chronic lung allograft dysfunction in lung transplant recipients. Respiratory viral infections can appear at any time post-transplant and are usually acquired in the community. All respiratory viral infections share similar clinical manifestations and are all currently diagnosed using nucleic acid testing. Influenza has good treatment options and prevention strategies, although these are hampered by resistance to neuraminidase inhibitors and lower vaccine immunogenicity in the transplant population. Other respiratory viruses, unfortunately, have limited treatments and preventive methods. This review summarizes the epidemiology, clinical manifestations, therapies and preventive measures for clinically significant RNA and DNA respiratory viruses, with the exception of SARS-CoV-2. This area is fast evolving and hopefully the coming decades will bring us new antivirals, immunologic treatments and vaccines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".