Clinical utility of correction factors for febrile young infants with traumatic lumbar punctures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Correction factors have been proposed for traumatic lumbar punctures (LPs) in febrile young infants. However, no studies have assessed their diagnostic utility. We sought to determine the proportion of traumatic LPs safely reclassified as low risk for bacterial meningitis using recently derived white blood cell (WBC) and protein correction factors. Methods: . Abnormal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) WBCs and protein were adjusted downward using a newly derived correction factor (877 red blood cells [RBCs]: 1 WBC), three commonly used correction factors (500 WBCs: 1 RBC; 1,000 WBCs: 1 WBC; peripheral RBCs: WBCs), and a newly derived protein correction factor (1,000 RBCs: 0.011 g/L protein). Results: There were 437 traumatic LPs including 357 (82%) with pleocytosis and 4 (0.9%) with bacterial meningitis. Overall, fewer infants were classified as having CSF pleocytosis using 877:1 and 1,000:1 ratios (38% and 43%, respectively), with 100% sensitivity and negative predictive value, and improved specificity (63% for 877:1, 58% for 1,000:1 ratios versus 19% for uncorrected counts). Among infants with pleocytosis, 877:1 and 1,000:1 ratios reclassified 191 (54%) and 171 (48%) as normal with no misclassified bacterial meningitis cases. Ratios of 500:1 and peripheral RBC:WBC misclassified 1 infant that had bacterial meningitis. Corrected CSF protein outperformed uncorrected protein in specificity but did not add diagnostic value following WBC-based correction. Conclusions: Correction ratios of 877:1 and 1,000:1 safely reclassified half of all febrile infants ≤60 days. These corrections should be considered when interpreting CSF results of traumatic LPs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".