MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249593456 · doi:10.1097/qco.0b013e3280ad4672

Aseptic meningitis

2007· review· en· W4249593456 on OpenAlexaff
Bonita E. Lee, H. Dele Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Infectious Diseases · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Immunology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAseptic meningitisMedicineEchovirusMeningitisProcalcitoninEnterovirusEtiologyAseptic processingAntibioticsOutbreakViral meningitisCerebrospinal fluidImmunologyVirologyMicrobiologyBacterial meningitisInternal medicinePediatricsSepsisSurgeryVirusBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To highlight some of the recent key epidemiologic and clinical diagnostic dilemmas of aseptic meningitis and to evaluate some tests that may help distinguish aseptic compared with bacterial meningitis. RECENT FINDINGS: Enteroviruses remain the most common cause of aseptic meningitis. Certain enteroviruses (e.g. coxsackie B5, echovirus 6, 9 and 30) are more likely to cause meningitis outbreaks, while others (coxsackie A9, B3 and B4) are mostly endemic. Nucleic acid tests are more sensitive than cultures in diagnosing enteroviral infections. In centers where the turnaround time for these tests is less than 24 h, there can be substantial cost savings and avoidance of unnecessary treatment of aseptic meningitis with antibiotics. Serum and stool specimens are important adjunct samples for diagnosing enteroviral infections in children. Cerebrospinal fluid protein (> or = 0.5 g/l) and serum procalcitonin (> or = 0.5 ng/ml) appear to be useful laboratory markers for distinguishing between bacterial and aseptic meningitis in children aged 28 days to 16 years, but they have relatively low sensitivity and specificity. SUMMARY: Enteroviruses are the major causes of aseptic meningitis. The major focus of diagnosis remains ruling out bacterial infection or confirming enteroviral etiology of infection. Properly implemented nucleic acid tests have the potential to reduce cost and unnecessary 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.008

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.

Opus teacher head0.178
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations154
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Infectious DiseasesSame topicViral Infections and Immunology ResearchFrench-language works237,207