Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Validation of a clinical prediction rule for the differential diagnosis of acute meningitis

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective: To attempt to validate a previously reported clinical prediction rule derived to assist in distinguishing between acute bacterial meningitis and acute viral meningitis.

Design: Retrospective chart review of patients treated at five hospitals between 1981 and 1990. The criterion standard for bacterial meningitis was a positive cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or blood culture or a positive test for bacterial antigen in the CSF. For viral meningitis, the criterion standard was a positive viral culture from CSF, stool, or blood or a discharge diagnosis of viral meningitis with no other etiology evident.

Setting: Two Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals, two county hospitals, and one private hospital, each affiliated with one of two medical schools.

Patients: All persons aged more than 17 years who were hospitalized over a ten-year period at one of five academically affiliated hospitals for the management of acute meningitis.

Measurements and main results: Sixty-two cases of bacterial meningitis and 98 cases of viral meningitis were confirmed. With all patients included, the discriminatory power of the model as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.977 (95% CI, 0.957–0.997), compared with the AUC of 0.97 in the derivation set of the original publication. The AUCs (95% CIs) for data subsets were: Dallas cases 0.994 (0.986–1.0), Milwaukee cases 0.912 (0.834–0.990); ages 18–39 years 0.952 (0.892–1.0), ages 40–59 years 0.99 (0.951–1.0), and age >60 years 0955 (0.898–1.0).

Conclusions. The authors conclude that the clinical prediction rule proved robust when applied to a geographically distinct population comprised exclusively of adults. There was sustained performance of the model when applied to cases from each city and from three age strata. Prospective validation of this prediction rule will be necessary to confirm its utility in clinical practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Geiseler PJ, Nelson KE, Levin S, Reddi KT, Moses VK. Community-acquired purulent meningitis: a review of 1,316 cases during the antibiotic era, 1954–1976. Rev Infect Dis. 1980;2:725–45.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. McGee ZA, Kaiser AB. Acute meningitis. In: Mandell GL, Douglas RG, Bennett JE (eds). Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1985;560–73.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Spanos A, Harrell FE Jr, Durack DT. Differential diagnosis of acute meningitis: an analysis of the predictive value of initial observations. JAMA. 1989;262:2700–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143:29–36.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Wasson JH, Sox HC, Neff RK, Goldman L. Clinical prediction rules: applications and methodological standards. N Engl J Med. 1985;313:793–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Young MJ, McMahon LF Jr, Stross JK. Prediction rules for patients with suspected myocardial infarction: applying guidelines in community hospitals. Arch Intern Med. 1987;147:1219–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Poses RM, Cebul RD, Collins M. The importance of disease prevalence in transporting clinical prediction rules: the case of streptococcal pharyngitis. Ann Intern Med. 1986;105:586–91.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Genton B, Berger JP. Cerebrospinal fluid lactate in 78 cases of adult meningitis. Intensive Care Med. 1990;16:196–200.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lindquist L, Linne T, Hansson LO, Kalin M, Axelsson G. Value of cerebrospinal fluid analysis in the differential diagnosis of meningitis: a study in 710 patients with suspected central nervous system infection. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1988;7:374–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Supported by an Institutional Research Grant under the Regents Appropriations program at UT/Southwestern Medical School.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McKinney, W.P., Heudebert, G.R., Harper, S.A. et al. Validation of a clinical prediction rule for the differential diagnosis of acute meningitis. J Gen Intern Med 9, 8–12 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02599135

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02599135

Key words

Navigation