MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066200771 · doi:10.1136/ebm.9.2.48

Review: adjuvant corticosteroid therapy reduces death, hearing loss, and neurological sequelae in bacterial meningitis

2004· article· en· W2066200771 on OpenAlexaff
Alison Morris

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboMeningitisPediatricsCorticosteroidClinical trialMEDLINERandomized controlled trialInternal medicineAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

van de Beek D, de Gans J, McIntyre P, et al. Corticosteroids in acute bacterial meningitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;(3):CD004305. Q In children and adults with acute bacterial meningitis (ABM), is adjuvant corticosteroid therapy more effective than placebo for reducing mortality, hearing loss, and neurological sequelae? Clinical impact ratings IM/Ambulatory care ★★★★★☆☆ Internal medicine ★★★★★☆☆ Neurology ★★★★★★☆ Infectious disease ★★★★★☆☆ ### ![Graphic][1] Data sources studies were identified by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2003), Medline (1966 to January 2003), EMBASE/Excerpta Medica (1974 to April 2002), and Healthline (1988 to April 2002); reviewing current trials published before April 2002; scanning reference lists; hand searching abstracts of congresses; and contacting researchers and experts. ### ![Graphic][2] Study selection and assessment studies in any language were selected if they were randomised controlled trials that compared any type of corticosteroid therapy adjuvant to antibiotics with placebo in patients with ABM and recorded case fatality rates. 2 reviewers independently assessed the quality of … [1]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [2]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Meta-analysislow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Meta-analysis
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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based MedicineSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207