Multivariate analyses and machine learning link sex and age with antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 and vaccination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h2>Summary</h2> Prevention of negative COVID-19 infection outcomes is associated with the quality of antibody responses, whose variance by age and sex is poorly understood. Network approaches identified sex and age effects in antibody responses and neutralization potential of <i>de novo</i> infection and vaccination throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Neutralization values followed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific receptor binding immunoglobulin G (RIgG), spike immunoglobulin G (SIgG) and spike and receptor immunoglobulin G (S, and RIgA) levels based on COVID-19 status. Serum immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibody titers correlated with neutralization only in females 40–60 years old (y.o.). Network analysis found males could improve IgA responses after vaccination dose 2. Complex correlation analyses found vaccination induced less antibody isotype switching and neutralization in older persons, especially in females. Sex-dependent antibody and neutralization decayed the fastest in older males. Shown sex and age characterization can direct studies integrating cell-mediated responses to define yet elusive correlates of protection and inform age and sex precision-focused vaccine design.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".