MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4231194698 · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-99375-1_130

Immunosenescence and Respiratory Infections Among Nursing Home Residents

2019· book-chapter· en· W4231194698 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Loeb

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunosenescenceMedicinePopulationImmunologyRespiratory infectionNursing homesRespiratory systemImmune systemEnvironmental healthNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Residents of nursing homes are at high risk of infectious complications due to respiratory infection. The nursing home setting places residents at high risk given the frequent contact among residents and by staff along with the possibility for continuous introduction of respiratory viruses from the community. Nursing home residents are among the most frail members of society. They have multiple comorbidities that can increase their risk of infection. Immunosenescence plays an important role in not only rendering these seniors susceptible in infection, particularly viral respiratory infection, but also interferes with protection. That is, the ability to mount a robust immune response to influenza and pneumococcal vaccine increase the risk. There have been a number of T cell deficits described in this population. CD4+ T cells, in particular T-regs and CMV-reactive CD4+ T cells, have been shown to be predictive of respiratory viral infection in this population. Although evidence exists that T cell subsets may correlate better with response to vaccine and protection, antibody responses to influenza vaccine remains an important correlate in this population. Large-scale epidemiologic studies are needed to establish better correlation between biomarkers for protection and respiratory and other pathogens that circulate in nursing homes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.007

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfluenza Virus Research Studies→French-language works237,207→