MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404121032 · doi:10.24908/qap.v1i2.18101

Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccine

2024· article· en· W4404121032 on OpenAlexaff
Harini Arulvarathan, Yasmine Abossi

Bibliographic record

VenueQapsule Queen s Undergraduate Health Sciences Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirologyVirusRespiratory systemMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RSV, or respiratory syncytial virus, poses a significant threat to newborns, the elderly, and immunocompromised individuals, but it may finally have a solution.1 The FDA authorized two RSV vaccinations for older people in May 2023, and the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends them for those over 60.1 Pfizer and GSK were the two pharmaceutical companies that took the lead in generating vaccines following Graham and McLellan's discovery of the structure of the F protein, which is a glycoprotein on the surface of the RSV virion that causes the virion membrane to fuse with a target cell membrane.2-3 In individuals 60 and older, GSK claims the vaccination is 94% effective against severe illness and 83% effective against symptomatic disease.2 In individuals 60 and older, Pfizer's vaccination is 86% effective against severe illness with at least three symptoms and 67% effective against symptomatic disease with at least two symptoms.2 On May 18, the FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee recommended FDA clearance for Pfizer's RSV vaccine to be administered during pregnancy to protect infants.2

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.025

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.361 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQapsule Queen s Undergraduate Health Sciences JournalSame topicRespiratory viral infections researchFrench-language works237,207