MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134851297 · doi:10.1136/ebm.7.2.60

Children infected with meningitis before 1 year of age were at increased risk for disability at 5 years of age

2002· article· en· W2134851297 on OpenAlexaff
Max Perlman

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPediatricsMedicineMeningitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(2001) BMJ 323, 533. Bedford H, de Louvois J, Halket S . , et al. . Meningitis in infancy in England and Wales: follow up at age 5 years. . Sep 8; . : . –6 . [OpenUrl][1][Abstract/FREE Full Text][2] QUESTION: In children who survived meningitis during their first year of life, what are the sequelae at 5 years of age? Inception cohort of children who survived an acute attack of meningitis in their first year compared with children who did not have meningitis. General practices in England and Wales, UK. 1717 children who contracted meningitis during their first year. Sex- and age-matched children from the same general practice as the index child formed the control group. Data at 5 years of age were available for 1584 children (92%) who had had meningitis and 1391 in the control group (94%). General practitioners completed questionnaires on children that described any problems in neuromotor development, learning, vision, hearing, speech and language, and behaviour, and the presence of seizure disorders. Parents completed questionnaires on their child's health, development, and schooling. Gestational age, birthweight, the organism that caused the meningitis, and age at … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DBMJ%26rft.stitle%253DBMJ%26rft.issn%253D0007-1447%26rft.aulast%253DBedford%26rft.auinit1%253DH.%26rft.volume%253D323%26rft.issue%253D7312%26rft.spage%253D533%26rft.epage%253D533%26rft.atitle%253DMeningitis%2Bin%2Binfancy%2Bin%2BEngland%2Band%2BWales%253A%2Bfollow%2Bup%2Bat%2Bage%2B5%2Byears%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1136%252Fbmj.323.7312.533%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F11546697%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/ijlink?linkType=ABST&journalCode=bmj&resid=323/7312/533&atom=%2Febmed%2F7%2F2%2F60.atom

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: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalmedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based MedicineSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207