Dexamethasone and long-term survival in bacterial meningitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data on the long-term effect of dexamethasone on survival in bacterial meningitis are lacking. METHODS: A long-term follow-up study of the European Dexamethasone in Adulthood Bacterial Meningitis Study was performed. In this double-blind, randomized clinical trial, 301 patients were randomly assigned to receive adjunctive dexamethasone (n = 157) or placebo (n = 144) between June 1993 and December 2001. We obtained survival data of patients using the Dutch Municipal Population Register. RESULTS: Death had occurred in 32 of 301 included patients (11%) at the primary outcome measurement 8 weeks after randomization. Follow-up was obtained for 228 of 246 evaluable patients (93%), with median follow-up of 13 years. Overall, 31 of 144 patients (22%) in the dexamethasone group died and 44 of 134 patients (33%) in the placebo group died (log-rank p = 0.029). After the primary end point of the study at 8 weeks, 20 patients in the dexamethasone group died and 23 patients in the placebo group died (log-rank p = 0.27), with age being the sole predictor of death (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In adults with community-acquired bacterial meningitis, the survival benefit from adjunctive dexamethasone therapy is obtained in the acute phase of the disease and remains for years. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study of a population of Dutch patients shows Class III evidence that dexamethasone provides an extended survival benefit in patients treated for bacterial meningitis, and this survival benefit extends as long as 20 years.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".