MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413110958 · doi:10.1093/infdis/jiaf420

Relative Effectiveness of High-Dose Versus Standard-Dose Influenza Vaccination Against Hospitalizations and Deaths According to Frailty Score: A Post Hoc Analysis of the DANFLU-1 Randomized Trial

2025· article· en· W4413110958 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Espersen, Niklas Dyrby Johansen, Daniel Modin, Kira Hyldekær Janstrup, Joshua Nealon, Sandrine Samson, Matthew M. Loiacono, Rebecca C. Harris, Melissa K. Andrew, Carsten Schade Larsen, Anne Marie Reimer Jensen, Nino Emanuel Landler, Brian Claggett, Scott D. Solomon, Martin Landray, Gunnar Gislason, Lars Køber, Jens‐Ulrik Stæhr Jensen, Pradeesh Sivapalan, Tor Biering‐Sørensen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersSanofi-Aventis DeutschlandDanish Cardiovascular AcademyNovo Nordisk FondenHjerteforeningen
KeywordsPost-hoc analysisMedicinePost hocRandomized controlled trialInfluenza vaccineInternal medicineGerontologyVaccinationVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a risk factor for adverse influenza-related outcomes. We assessed the effectiveness of high-dose inactivated influenza vaccination (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccination (SD-IIV) according to a frailty score. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the randomized feasibility trial of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV conducted during the 2021-2022 influenza season in older adults aged 65-79 years. We assessed prespecified outcomes, including hospitalizations and deaths, as first and recurrent events. Frailty was defined according to the hospital frailty risk score (HFRS). RESULTS: Among 12 477 included participants (mean age, 71.7 years; 47.1% female), 10 689 (85.7%) were categorized as having low frailty (HFRS <5) and 1784 (14.3%) had intermediate or high frailty (HFRS ≥5). HD-IIV versus SD-IIV was associated with a lower risk of first and recurrent hospitalizations for pneumonia or influenza regardless of the HFRS. For participants with low frailty there were 22 events (hazard ratio [HR], 0.37 [95% confidence interval, .15-.96]) and 25 recurrent events (incidence rate ratio, 0.31 [.11-.84]), and for those with intermediate or high frailty there were 16 events (HR, 0.33 [.11-1.01]) and 18 recurrent events (incidence rate ratio, 0.28 [.09-.92]; P value for continuous interaction with HFRS [Pinteraction] = .92 for first and Pinteraction = .93 for recurrent events). The HFRS modified the association of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV with all-cause mortality (Pinteraction = .02), with an association with reduced risk in participants with low frailty only (43 events, HR, 0.26 [95% confidence interval, .13-.55]). CONCLUSIONS: HD-IIV was associated with a lower risk of first and recurrent hospitalizations for pneumonia and influenza compared with SD-IIV and may be preferred for older adults, irrespective of frailty status. The HFRS modified the association of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV with all-cause mortality.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.009
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Infectious Diseases→Same topicInfluenza Virus Research Studies→French-language works237,207→