Management of suspected paediatric meningitis: a multicentre prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To quantify delays during management of children with suspected meningitis. DESIGN: Multicentre prospective cohort study. SETTING: Three UK tertiary paediatric centres; June 2011-June 2012 PATIENTS: 388 children aged <16 years hospitalised with suspected meningitis or undergoing lumbar puncture (LP) during sepsis evaluation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time of prehospital and in-hospital assessments, LP, antibiotic treatment and discharge; types of prehospital medical assessment and microbiological results. Data collected from hospital records and parental interview. RESULTS: 220/388 (57%) children were seen by a medical professional prehospitalisation (143 by a general practitioner). Median times from initial hospital assessment to LP and antibiotic administration were 4.8 hours and 3.1 hours, respectively; 62% of children had their LP after antibiotic treatment. Median time to LP was shorter for children aged <3 months (3.0 hours) than those aged 3-23 months (6.2 hours, P<0.001) or age ≥2 years (20.3 hours, P<0.001). In meningitis of unknown cause, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) PCR was performed for meningococcus in 7%, pneumococcus in 10% and enterovirus in 76%. When no pathogen was identified, hospital stay was longer if LP was performed after antibiotics (median 12.5 days vs 5.0 days, P=0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Most children had LP after antibiotics were administered, reducing yield from CSF culture, and PCRs were underused despite national recommendations. These deficiencies reduce the ability to exclude bacterial meningitis, increasing unnecessary hospital stay and antibiotic treatment.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".