MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4296430438 · doi:10.1093/pch/21.supp5.e78

Comparing First- and Second-Season Palivizumab Prophylaxis in Patients with Hemodynamically Significant Congenital Heart Disease (HSCHD) in the ‘Caress’ Database (2005-2014)

2016· article· en· W4296430438 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
B Paes, A Li, I Mitchell, K Lanctot

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalivizumabHeart diseaseDemographicsProspective cohort studyRespiratory systemGestational age

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND: Compared with normal children, RSV-related hospi-talization (RSVH) rates in children with HSCHD are 2-4 fold higher even up to 2 years of age with an overall weighted mean mortality rate of 5.2%. Pediatric advisory guidelines recommend prophylaxis against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) for infants with HSCHD. However, current recommendations cast doubt as to whether prophylaxis is beneficial beyond 1 year of age. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there are differences in RSVH in HSCHD infants receiving palivizumab during the first versus second RSV season in the Canadian Registry of palivizumab (CARESS). DESIGN/METHODS: CARESS is a prospective registry of infants who received ≥1 dose of palivizumab at one of 32 sites across Canada during the 2005-2014 RSV seasons. Demographic data were collected at enrollment and respiratory-illness-related hospitalization events recorded monthly. In the event of a hospitalization, the relevant hospital records were reviewed by the site’s research nurse for detailed information on criteria for hospital-ization, length of stay (regular ward vs. ICU), days on respiratory support and/or intubation, and RSV test type and diagnosis. Infants aged <24 months with cyanotic or acyanotic HSCHD were recruited. RESULTS: 1306 (64.9%) of 2013 infants received prophylaxis only for the first season. 707 (35.1%) were prophylaxed during the second season (average age in months: 4.7 [first season] vs 14.7 [second season]). Baseline demographics for both seasons were similar. However, infants aged >1year had a more complicated neonatal course, with significantly longer neonatal length of stay (46.7 versus 25.6 days). Infants received: 4.5±1.4 injections; 90.5% of their expected injections and 88.2% of their injections within the appropriate time intervals. 26 infants in the first year (RSVH rate: 2.26%) and 11 infants in the second year (RSVH rate: 2.09%) were hospitalized. Cox regression analysis showed no significant differences in hazards between infants in their first or second year of prophylaxis in the time to first RSVH (Hazard ratio: 1.4, 95%CI 0.5-4.0, p=0.52) CONCLUSION: Infants enrolled in the CARESS database in the second RSV season had a similar hazard of RSVH as those in the first year of life. These findings suggest that infants aged >1 year with HSCHD who remain unstable, are equally at risk for RSVH and merit palivizumab prophylaxis.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research→French-language works237,207→