MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W195813805 · doi:10.1093/pch/7.7.449

Controversies in the management of bacterial meningitis

2002· article· en· W195813805 on OpenAlexaff
Trenna L. Sutcliffe

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDexamethasoneMedicineStreptococcus pneumoniaeMeningitisHaemophilus influenzaeBacterial meningitisIntensive care medicinePediatricsInternal medicineMicrobiologyAntibioticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bacterial meningitis is an important infection of childhood with significant morbidity and mortality, and clinicians are faced with controversies over steroid use and fluid restriction in its initial management because the standard of practice is not clear. A 1999 survey of paediatric infectious diseases specialists demonstrated that only 56% of respondents recommended dexamethasone for Haemophilus influenzae type b meningitis and only 34% recommended dexamethasone for Streptococcus pneumoniae meningitis, despite recommendations for dexamethasone in the 1997 Red Book. The present article illustrates a typical case presentation of bacterial meningitis, and discusses dexamethasone use and fluid restriction. The use of intravenous fluid therapy is also reviewed, based on results from the single prospective randomized clinical trial in this area.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0110.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicGastroesophageal reflux and treatments→French-language works237,207→