Summary of the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Statement for 2024–2025
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) reviews the evolving evidence on influenza immunization and provides annual recommendations regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines.The NACI Statement on Seasonal Influenza Vaccine for 2024-2025 updates the NACI recommendations from the previous year.Objective: To summarize the 2024-2025 NACI seasonal influenza vaccine recommendations and to highlight new and updated information.Methods: For the development of the Statement on Seasonal Influenza Vaccine for 2024-2025, the NACI Influenza Working Group applied the NACI evidence-based process to assess available evidence and formulate recommendations.These recommendations underwent a thorough evaluation and were approved by NACI based on the available evidence.Results: Key updates for the 2024-2025 influenza season include updated immunization recommendations reflecting changes in influenza epidemiology and revised guidance for vaccine administration during pregnancy and in older adults. Conclusion:The National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommends that any ageappropriate quadrivalent or trivalent influenza vaccine should be used for individuals six months of age and older who do not have contraindications or precautions.NACI reaffirms the importance of influenza vaccination with inactivated or recombinant influenza vaccines in pregnancy.Finally, NACI recommends that inactivated high-dose (IIV-HD), inactivated adjuvanted (IIV-Adj) or recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV) should be offered, when available, over other influenza vaccines for adults 65 years of age and older.
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 | 0.011 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.030 |
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".