Do Levels of SARS-CoV-2 Anti-Spike Antibody Titers After Vaccination Predict Future Infections in Hemodialysis Patients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There are few data on whether higher severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody titers correlate with subsequent infection in the general population, much less in the dialysis patients. Methods: Fifty-four hemodialysis patients who had antibody titer measured against SARS-CoV-2 after vaccination were retrospectively looked at after 6 months. Rates of subsequent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection were correlated with initial antibody titers. Results: The mean antibody titer in the patients who subsequently developed SARS-CoV-2 infection was 437 relative fluorescent units (RFU) as compared with mean antibody titer of 1,436 RFU in patients who did not developed infection. Conclusion: It seems higher antibody titers are in general protective against subsequent infection; however, some patients developed subsequent infection despite having high antibody titers. World J Nephrol Urol. 2023;12(1):8-10 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/wjnu439
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".