SynthesisBMC medicine2026
Detection of sequelae from acute meningitis during clinical review by a healthcare provider: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeurological sequelae from acute meningitis are estimated to affect more than 30% of survivors worldwide, though often underreported or undetected due to inadequate follow-up, limited access to healthcare services, and diagnostic challenges. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the time of administered health assessments for the detection of meningitis-related sequelae associated with acute meningitis diagnosis in adult and pediatric populations.
methodsA literature review was conducted in three databases. Studies documenting the time frame of sequelae detection after an acute episode of all-cause meningitis were included. Descriptive analysis and meta-analysis of pooled prevalence for neurological outcomes were performed, with subgroup analysis per timepoint of healthcare assessment.
resultsA total of 89 studies met inclusion criteria, reporting 9311 adult and 18,658 pediatric meningitis cases. Among adults, 7301 (78.4%) underwent sequelae assessment, with 1339 (18%) diagnosed. The most frequently reported sequelae were hearing loss, followed by focal neurological deficits, psychological after-effects, neurocognitive impairments, seizures, hydrocephalus, speech disorders, vision impairment, and limb loss. While more were assessed before discharge (5270 vs. 2711), the proportion of sequelae diagnoses was higher post-discharge. The pooled prevalence of sequelae was 24.8% (95% CI 20.5-29.2%) at discharge, compared to 41.5% (95% CI 25.7-57.3%) within 3 months and 31.9% (95% CI 18.5-45.3%) beyond 3 months post-discharge. In children, 14,826 (79%) were assessed, and 3484 (24%) had sequelae, with the most common sequelae being hearing loss, followed by focal neurological deficits, seizures, neurocognitive, and neurodevelopmental impairments. More were assessed post-discharge (8298 vs. 7180), with a higher pooled prevalence of sequelae diagnoses post-discharge. At discharge, the pooled prevalence of sequelae was 28.9% (95% CI 20.8-37%), compared to 29.9% (95% CI 19-40.8%) within 3 months and 38.2% (95% CI 30.3-46.1%) beyond 3 months after discharge.
conclusionsMeningitis-related sequelae significantly impact quality of life. This review highlights variability and critical gaps in their evaluation, detection, and management, underscoring the need for routine monitoring from discharge through consistent follow-up assessments, as recommended by the new WHO guidelines on meningitis diagnosis, treatment, and care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.