The link between influenza and myocardial infarction: vaccination protects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The association between influenza and cardiovascular disease has been known since the influenza pandemics of the early years of the last century. This association is more consistent and more lasting in the case of particularly severe infections. Several pathogens, including influenza viruses, can modulate the inflammatory response and influence the biology of atherosclerotic plaque to rupture it and cause a Type 1 myocardial infarction. Clinically relevant viral infections can also exacerbate pre-existing cardiovascular disease and contribute to the development of a Type 2 myocardial infarction through an increase in the metabolic demands of the myocardial tissue for fever and tachycardia and the possible induction of hypoxaemia. Evidence of a relevant protective efficacy of influenza vaccination provides further robust and convincing support for a causal link between influenza and myocardial infarction. Consistent cardiovascular protection linked to influenza vaccination has also been demonstrated in patients with recent myocardial infarction to suggest the possibility that this procedure may become an integral part of in-hospital management of acute coronary syndromes. Despite the solidity of these evidences, acknowledged by the guidelines that recommend influenza vaccination in patients at increased cardiovascular risk, still today an unacceptably high proportion of patients at high cardiovascular risk do not receive flu vaccination. Despite some potential limitations of the current flu vaccination, its advantages in terms of reducing cardiovascular events and related mortality are still such as to justify its wide use, especially, but not limited to, in patients with high cardiovascular risk.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".