COMMENTARY Clinical features of H1N1 2009 infection in critically ill immunocompromised patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seasonal influenza virus has been described as an emerging and severe pathogen in immunocompromised hosts. Since the beginning of the 2009 influenza A novel H1N1 pandemic, several series have described the clinical course of the disease in various populations. We report the clinical course of H1N1 2009 infection in 10 immunocompromised patients. Half of the patients received long-term steroid therapy. Disease was characterized by a clinical picture similar to that of non-immunocompromised patients but with prolonged course and higher mortality. Infection is a major source of morbidity and the leading cause of death in immunocompromised patients [1]. The increased susceptibility to infection results from the intertwined effects of the immunocompromising condition, treatments, and co-morbidities [1]. Human infection with the novel H1N1 influenza virus was first recognized in early April 2009 and declared a worldwide pandemic by the World Health Organization in June 2009. Recent case series provide information on the clinical course, risk factors, and outcome of H1N1(v) infection [2-4]. Both New Zealand and Canada have experi enced H1N1(v) outbreaks with severe illness requir ing intensive care unit (ICU) admission, ventilatory support, and rescue therapies. However, no case series have specifically described the features of H1NI(v) infection in immunocompromised patients. Here, we report the clinical and epidemiologic features in 10 critically ill immunocompromised patients with H1N1(v) infection.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".