Predicting major clinical events among Canadian adults with laboratory-confirmed influenza infection using the influenza severity scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We developed and validated the Influenza Severity Scale (ISS), a standardized risk assessment for influenza, to estimate and predict the probability of major clinical events in patients with laboratory-confirmed infection. Data from the Canadian Immunization Research Network's Serious Outcomes Surveillance Network (2011/2012-2018/2019 influenza seasons) enabled the selecting of all laboratory-confirmed influenza patients. A machine learning-based approach then identified variables, generated weighted scores, and evaluated model performance. This study included 12,954 patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza infections. The optimal scale encompassed ten variables: demographic (age and sex), health history (smoking status, chronic pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, and influenza vaccination status), clinical presentation (cough, sputum production, and shortness of breath), and function (need for regular support for activities of daily living). As a continuous variable, the scale had an AU-ROC of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.71-0.74). Aggregated scores classified participants into three risk categories: low (ISS < 30; 79.9% sensitivity, 51% specificity), moderate (ISS ≥ 30 but < 50; 54.5% sensitivity, 55.9% specificity), and high (ISS ≥ 50; 51.4% sensitivity, 80.5% specificity). ISS demonstrated a solid ability to identify patients with hospitalized laboratory-confirmed influenza at increased risk for Major Clinical Events, potentially impacting clinical practice and research.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".