Enteroviral and herpes simplex virus central nervous system infections in infants < 90 days old: a Paediatric Investigators’ Collaborative Network on Infections in Canada (PICNIC) study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The relative contribution of viruses to central nervous system (CNS) infections in young infants is not clear. For viral CNS infections, there are limited data on features that suggest HSV etiology or on predictors of unfavorable outcome. METHODS: In this cross-sectional retrospective study, seven centers from the Pediatric Investigators Collaborative Network on Infections in Canada identified infants < 90 days of age with CNS infection proven to be due to enterovirus (EV) or herpes simplex virus (HSV) January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2014. RESULTS: Of 174 CNS infections with a proven etiology, EV accounted for 103 (59%) and HSV for 7 (4%). All HSV cases and 41 (40%) EV cases presented before 21 days of age. Four HSV cases (57%) and 5 EV cases (5%) had seizures. Three (43%) HSV and 23 (23%) EV cases lacked cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pleocytosis. HSV cases were more likely to require ICU admission (p = 0.010), present with seizures (p = 0.031) and have extra-CNS disease (p < 0.001). Unfavorable outcome occurred in 12 cases (11% of all EV and HSV infections) but was more likely following HSV than EV infection (4 (57%) versus 8 (8%); p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Viruses accounted for approximately two-thirds of proven CNS infections in the first 90 days of life. Empiric therapy for HSV should be considered in suspected CNS infections in the first 21 days even in the absence of CSF pleocytosis unless CSF parameters are suggestive of bacterial meningitis. Neurodevelopmental follow-up should be considered in infants whose course of illness is complicated by seizures.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".