Characterizing the interactions between influenza and respiratory syncytial viruses and their implications for epidemic control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Pathogen-pathogen interactions represent a critical but little-understood feature of infectious disease dynamics. In particular, experimental evidence suggests that influenza virus and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) compete with each other, such that infection with one confers temporary protection against the other. However, such interactions are challenging to study using common epidemiologic methods. Here, we use a mathematical modeling approach, in conjunction with detailed surveillance data from Hong Kong and Canada, to infer the strength and duration of the interaction between influenza and RSV. Based on our estimates, we further utilize our model to evaluate the potential conflicting effects of live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIV) on RSV burden. We find evidence of a moderate to strong, negative, bidirectional interaction, such that infection with either virus yields 40-100% protection against infection with the other for one to five months. Assuming that LAIV reduces RSV susceptibility in a similar manner, we predict that the impact of such a vaccine at the population level would likely depend greatly on underlying viral circulation patterns. More broadly, we highlight the utility of mathematical models as a tool to characterize pathogen-pathogen interactions.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".