Application of the ATLAS score for evaluating the severity of Clostridium difficile infection in teaching hospitals in Mexico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For clinicians, a practical bedside tool for severity assessment and prognosis of patients with Clostridium difficile infection is a highly desirable unmet medical need. SETTING: Two general teaching hospitals in northeast Mexico. POPULATION: Adult patients with C. difficile infection. METHODS: Prospective observational study. RESULTS: Patients included had a median of 48 years of age, 54% of male gender and an average of 24.3 days length of hospital stay. Third generation cephalosporins were the antibiotics most commonly used prior to C. difficile infection diagnosis. Patients diagnosed with C. difficile infection had a median ATLAS score of 4 and 56.7% of the subjects had a score between 4 and 7 points. Patients with a score of 8 through 10 points had 100% mortality. CONCLUSION: The ATLAS score is a potentially useful tool for the routine evaluation of patients at the time of C. difficile infection diagnosis. At 30 days post-diagnosis, patients with a score of ≤3 points had 100% survival while all of those with scores ≥8 died. Patients with scores between 4 and 7 points had a greater probability of colectomy with an overall cure rate of 70.1%.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".