Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the Editor: We report results of the effect of inactivated seasonal influenza vaccination on risk of pandemic (H1N1) 2009 in a cohort of nurses in Canada who participated in a recent randomized controlled trial that compared the effectiveness of surgical masks with that of N95 respirators in preventing influenza (1). From September 23, 2008, through December 8, 2008, a total of 446 nurses from 8 hospitals in the province of Ontario were enrolled. They were then randomly assigned an intervention; 225 were assigned to wear surgical masks, and 221 were assigned to wear the N95 respirator. The mean age of participants was 36.2 years; 94% were women. A total of 128 (30.3%) received the trivalent influenza vaccine. Vaccination status was similar between the groups: 68 (30.2%) persons in the surgical mask group and 62 (28.1%) persons in the N95 respirator group had received the 2008–2009 trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. The nurses were monitored from January 12, 2009, through April 23, 2009. Blood specimens for serologic analysis were obtained before enrollment and at the end of the follow-up period. End-of-study serum samples were collected from April 23 through May 15, 2009. Serologic infection was defined by a>4-fold increase in influenza-specific hemagglutinin inhibition assay titer between baseline and convalescent-phase serum samples by using turkey
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.269 | 0.183 |
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".