The Effect of Age and Comorbidities: Children vs. Adults in Their Response to SARS-CoV-2 Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While children have experienced less severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) after SARS-CoV-2 infection than adults, the cause of this remains unclear. The objective of this study was to describe the humoral immune response to COVID-19 in child vs. adult household contacts, and to identify predictors of the response over time. In this prospective cohort study, children with a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test (index case) were recruited along with their adult household contacts. Serum IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 spike proteins were compared between children and adults at 6 and 12 months after infection. A total of 91 participants (37 adults and 54 children) from 36 families were enrolled. Overall, 78 (85.7%) participants were seropositive for anti-S1/S2 IgG antibody at 6 months following infection; this was higher in children than in adults (92.6% vs. 75.7%) (p = 0.05). Significant predictors of a lack of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity were age ≥ 25 vs. < 12 years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.23, p = 0.04), presence of comorbidities (vs. none, adjusted OR = 0.23, p = 0.03), and immunosuppression (vs. immunocompetent, adjusted OR = 0.17, p = 0.02).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".