MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413637811 · doi:10.1097/ta.0000000000004777

Prophylactic antibiotic use in closed basilar skull fractures: A nationwide cohort study

2025· article· en· W4413637811 on OpenAlexaff
Eunji Kim, Jinwook Hong, Hankei Shin, Jong Youn Moon, Woongsang Sunwoo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Surgical Oncology
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeningitisIncidence (geometry)CohortAntibioticsPediatricsCohort studyRetrospective cohort studyCumulative incidenceHazard ratioSurgeryInternal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of prophylactic antibiotics for preventing meningitis in patients with closed basilar skull fractures remains controversial. This nationwide cohort study aimed to evaluate the association between prophylactic antibiotic use and the incidence of meningitis in patients with closed basilar skull fractures using Korean national claims data. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted with basilar skull fractures between 2002 and 2019 using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision , code S021. Data were obtained from the National Health Insurance Service sample cohort database in South Korea. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of meningitis following closed basilar skull fractures, and those with open fractures or those who underwent surgery during hospitalization were excluded. RESULTS: Of the 1,173 patients included, 537 (45.8%) received prophylactic antibiotics and 636 (54.2%) did not. Patients who received antibiotics were significantly older and had higher rates of intensive care unit admission. Antibiotic use was more common in the elderly group (65 years or older) compared with pediatric (younger than 18 years) and adult (18-64 years) groups. Among those who received antibiotics, 15 cases of meningitis (2.6%) were reported, with no clear association between the type or duration of antibiotic and meningitis occurrence. The cumulative incidence of meningitis was extremely low in both groups, and there was no statistically significant difference in meningitis risk between the antibiotic and non-antibiotic groups across all observation periods. Adjusted hazard ratios indicated no significant association between antibiotic use and meningitis risk, and this finding was consistent in subgroup analyses by age. CONCLUSION: This study found no significant association between prophylactic antibiotic use and reduced risk of meningitis in patients with closed basilar skull fractures. These findings suggest that routine prophylactic antibiotic administration may not provide additional benefits in preventing meningitis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical CareSame topicHead and Neck Surgical OncologyFrench-language works237,207