MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4296430606 · doi:10.1093/pch/21.supp5.e77c

Comparison of First- and Second-Season Palivizumab Prophylaxis in Patients with Chronic Lung Disease (CLD) in the ‘Caress’ Database (2005-2014)

2016· article· en· W4296430606 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
B Paes, D Wang, A Li, I Mitchell, K Lanctot

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalivizumabMedicineGestational agePediatricsRespiratory systemBirth weightIncidence (geometry)Lung diseaseLungInternal medicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) related hospitaliza-tion (RSVH) rates are 10-fold higher in infants with CLD compared with healthy term infants until 24 months of age. Current pediatric advisory guidelines recommend RSV prophylaxis for CLD infants < 2 years of age based on oxygen requirement for at least 28 days after birth during the first RSV season and those who continue to require chronic medical therapy for the management of CLD during the second season. OBJECTIVES: This study compared RSVH rates in CLD infants who received palivizumab during the first RSV season (FS) versus the second season (SS) in the Canadian Registry of Palivizumab (CARESS) database. DESIGN/METHODS: CARESS is a prospective registry of infants who received 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 were recorded monthly. Infants aged < 24 months with CLD were enrolled. RESULTS: 797 (55%) and 647 (45%) of 1444 CLD infants were prophy-laxed during FS and SS respectively (average age: 6.9 [FS] versus 13.6 [SS] months). SS infants had a lower gestational age [29.7 versus 31.3 weeks, F(1, 1440) = 29.9, p=<0.0005] and birth weight [1447 versus 1762 grams, F(1, 1436) = 29.3, p=<0.0005]. Infants prophylaxed in the SS also experienced more complicated neonatal courses with: prolonged respiratory support [63.4 versus 50.0 days, F(1, 1089) = 16.9, p=<0.0005], oxygen therapy [135.7 versus 74.8 days, F(1, 1155) = 97.4, p=<0.0005], and longer hospital stays [102.0 versus 72.0 days, F(1, 1369) = 62.1, p=<0.0005]. RSVH rates were 2.23% (FS) and 2.66% (SS). Cox regression adjusted for daycare attendance, multiple births, gestational age, birth weight and neonatal complications found no significant differences in the time to first RSVH between FS and SS infants (Hazard ratio: 0.96, 95% CI 0.37–2.52, p=0.94). CONCLUSION: SS infants who received RSV prophylaxis for CLD had a similar hazard of RSVH to those who only received palivizumab in the first year of life. The findings imply that FS and SS infants are correctly selected for RSV prophylaxis based on the stipulated criteria and their severity of illness and that SS infants are equally at risk for RSVH compared to FS infants.

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)0.005
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 score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 topicRespiratory viral infections research→French-language works237,207→