Results of a clinical study of the influenza tetravalent inactivated subunit adjuvant vaccine Grippol Quadrivalent in children aged 6 months to 5 years (inclusive)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article presents the results of a clinical investigation on the administration of the Grippol Quadrivalent vaccine (influenza tetravalent inactivated subunit adjuvant vaccine) in children from 6 months to 5 years old. The vaccine has demonstrated no less effectiveness in comparison with the Grippol plus vaccine (influenza trivalent inactivated polymer-subunit vaccine).comparable results were obtained for all evaluated indicators of immunological efficacy against matching strains of the influenza virus, while for additional strain B (Yamagata line) there was a statistically significant difference in the increase in the immune response in the Grippol Quadrivalent group. The results of the assessment of the reactogenicity and frequency of systemic adverse events indicated a favorable and comparable safety profile of the vaccines Grippol Quadrivalent and Grippol plus in children from 6 months to 5 years old. The data obtained allowed us to conclude that the immunological efficacy of the Grippol Quadrivalent vaccine is no less when compared to the Grippol plus vaccine, as well as a comparable safety and reactogenicity profile. According to the results of the clinical investigation, on 08/04/2023, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation amended the “Instructions for the medical use of the drug”: Grippol Quadrivalent is indicated for children from the age of 6 months.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".