Spinal infections in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: This multicentre, retrospective study aimed to improve our knowledge of primary pyogenic spinal infections in children by analyzing a large consecutive case series. Patients and Methods: The medical records of children with such an infection, treated at four tertiary institutions between 2004 and 2014, were analyzed retrospectively. Epidemiological, clinical, paraclinical, radiological, and microbiological data were evaluated. There were 103 children, of whom 79 (76.7%) were aged between six months and four years. Results: We confirmed a significant male predominance in the incidence of primary pyogenic spinal infections in children (65%). The lumbar spine was the most commonly affected region, and 27 infections (26.2%) occurred at L4/5. The white blood cell count was normal in 61 children (59%), and the CRP level was normal in 43 (42%). Blood cultures were performed in 95 children, and were positive in eight (8%). A total of 20 children underwent culture of biopsy or aspiration material, which was positive in eight (40%). Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) and Kingella ( K.) kingae were the most frequently isolated pathogens. Conclusion: MSSA remains the most frequently isolated pathogen in children with primary pyogenic infection of the spine, but K. kingae should be considered as an important pathogen in children aged between six months and four years. Therefore, an empirical protocol for antibiotic treatment should be used, with consideration being made for the triphasic age distribution and specific bacteriological aetiology. In the near future, the results of polymerase chain reaction assay on throat swabs may allow the indirect identification of K. kingae spondylodiscitis in young children and thus aid early treatment. However, these preliminary results require validation by other prospective multicentre studies. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:542-8.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".