MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312178830 · doi:10.1186/s13223-022-00750-7

Myopericarditis following both BNT162b2 and NVX-CoV2373

2022· article· en· W4312178830 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Saima Ahmad, Chino Yuson, Adrianna Le, Pravin Hissaria

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPericarditis and Cardiac Tamponade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyopericarditisMedicineVaccinationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicIntensive care medicinePediatricsVirologyMyocarditisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Myopericarditis is a well reported complication associated with SARS-Cov-2 (COVID-19) infection and vaccinations; particularly with mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273), and in the young male population. The risk-to-benefit ratio in sequential vaccination dosing in young males is further clouded in the era of the omicron variant with its reported enhanced immune escape. STUDY DESIGN: A case series of two cases of post vaccination myopericarditis following the NVX-CoV2373 after also developing myopericarditis with BNT162b2. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, we are the first to describe post vaccination myopericarditis following NVX-CoV2373 after also developing myopericarditis with BNT162b2. The similarities in presentation between the reactions of both platforms would suggest a similar pathogenesis, although the exact mechanism remains unknown. Further studies are necessary to identify these mechanisms, as well as to identify biomarkers that may identify vulnerable populations. On-going vigilance is necessary to identify those who may be at an increased risk of post-COVID vaccine myopericarditis.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergy Asthma and Clinical ImmunologySame topicPericarditis and Cardiac TamponadeFrench-language works237,207