MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W980136096

A Post-Licensure Evaluation of the Safety of Live Attenuated Influenza Vaccine in U.S. Children 5-17 Years of Age

2012· article· en· W980136096 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Seth Toback

Bibliographic record

Venue1st National Immunization Conference Online (NIC Online) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLive attenuated influenza vaccineMedicinePediatricsAdverse effectVaccinationInfluenza vaccineFamily medicineInternal medicineImmunology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background • The safety of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) has been evaluated in 26,031 children enrolled in placeboand trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV)–controlled clinical trials and a community-based open-label study.1,2 • LAIV was initially approved in the United States in 2003 for eligible individuals 5–49 years of age; the age indication was lowered to include children as young as 2 years in 2007. • As part of a postlicensure commitment to the US Food and Drug Administration, MedImmune conducted a postmarketing evaluation of the safety of LAIV in 60,000 LAIV recipients 5–49 years of age, including approximately 20,000 individuals in each of 3 age cohorts (5–8 y, 9–17 y, and 18–49 y). • LAIV is also approved in other countries for use in eligible individuals aged 2–49 years (2–17 y in the European Union and 2–59 y in Canada). Objective • To evaluate the postlicensure safety of LAIV among US children aged 5–8 and 9–17 years Methods • Safety data were prospectively collected from a Kaiser Permanente Health Plan database of 4 million members in Northern California, Hawaii, and Colorado; members received LAIV and TIV as part of routine care. • Rates of medically attended events (MAEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were assessed in eligible children 5–17 years of age receiving LAIV from October 2003–March 2008; comparators were multiple nonrandomized controls, including self-control, matched unvaccinated controls, and matched TIV recipients. • Subjects were matched based on age, sex, and previous healthcare use. • Children at high risk (eg, those with underlying medical conditions for whom LAIV was not recommended) were excluded from analysis. • MAEs were identified in the clinic, emergency department, and hospital. • All MAEs and SAEs through 42 days postvaccination and all hospitalizations and deaths through 6 months postvaccination were analyzed (Table 1).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue1st National Immunization Conference Online (NIC Online)Same topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207