MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098855999

TITLE: Antivirals for Influenza: A Review of the Clinical Benefit and Harm

2010· article· en· W7098855999 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZanamivirOseltamivirPandemicNeuraminidaseNeuraminidase inhibitorMEDLINECause of deathDisease
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seasonal influenza is widely recognized as a cause of significant morbidity. 1 The majority of infected individuals exhibit self-limited, uncomplicated symptoms. 1 However, severe disease, complications, and death may occur particularly in individuals over the age of 65, in younger children, and in individuals with comorbidities (including respiratory or cardiovascular disorders, immunodeficiency, or diabetes). 1 In 2009, pandemic H1N1 influenza was associated with significant morbidity and mortality particularly in children, young adults, the obese, and pregnant women. 2 Antiviral drugs currently indicated in Canada for the prophylaxis or treatment of influenza are amantadine, a M2 ion channel blocker, and the neuraminidase inhibitors oseltamivir (Tamiflu®, Roche) and zanamavir (Relenza®, GlaxoSmithKline). 3-5 Peravimir, an investigational neuraminidase inhibitor, has not yet been approved by Health Canada but has received a Emergency Use Authorization in the United States for use in select seriously ill hospitalized patients with confirmed or suspected pandemic H1N1 influenza. 6 This report reviews evidence for the clinical benefits and harms of amantadine, oseltamivir, and zanamivir for the treatment or prevention of seasonal influenza. Guidelines for the use of

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207