Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guideline on Closure of Myelomeningocele Within 48 Hours to Decrease Infection Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Appropriate timing for closure of myelomeningocele (MM) varies in the literature. Older studies present 48 h as the timeframe after which infection complication rates rise. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this guideline is to determine if closing the MM within 48 h decreases the risk of wound infection or ventriculitis. METHODS: The Guidelines Task Force developed search terms and strategies used to search PubMed and Embase for relevant literature published between 1966 and September 2016. Strict inclusion/exclusion criteria were used to screen abstracts and to develop a list of relevant articles for full-text review. Full text articles were then reviewed and when appropriate, included in the evidentiary table. The class of evidence was evaluated, discussed, and assigned to each study that met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A total of 148 abstracts were identified and reviewed. A total of 31 articles were selected for full text analysis. Only 4 of these studies met inclusion criteria. CONCLUSION: There is insufficient evidence that operating within 48 h decreases risk of wound infection or ventriculitis in 1 Class III study. There is 1 Class III study that provides evidence of global increase in postoperative infection after 48 h, but is not specific to wound infection or ventriculitis. There is 1 Class III study that provides evidence if surgery is going to be delayed greater than 48 h, antibiotics should be given.The full guideline can be found at https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-spina-bifida-chapter-4.
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 | 0.030 | 0.108 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.028 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.005 |
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".