MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009494520 · doi:10.1128/aac.00605-12

Sustained Clinical Response as an Endpoint in Treatment Trials of Clostridium difficile-Associated Diarrhea

2012· article· en· W2009494520 on OpenAlexaff
Stuart Johnson, Dale N. Gerding, Thomas Louie, Nancy Ruíz, Sherwood L. Gorbach

Bibliographic record

VenueAntimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsClostridium difficileDiarrheaMedicineClinical endpointClinical trialClostridiumClostridium InfectionsMicrobiologyClostridiaceaeEndpoint DeterminationInternal medicineAntibioticsIntensive care medicineBiologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recurrence of diarrhea following initially successful treatmentis a major shortcoming in the treatment of Clostridium diffi-cile-associated diarrhea (CDAD). Sustained response is a clinical endpoint proposed to account for differences among treatment agents with respect to a combination of initial response/cure and recurrence. Until recently, vancomycin was the only FDA-approved treat-ment for C. difficile infection (CDI). Treatment guidelines have recommended metronidazole for a first occurrence of nonsevere CDI and for a first relapse or reinfection (2, 3, 4). Vancomycin and metronidazole are both effective in providing initial response, with85 % cure rates, but 20 to 40 % of patients whose symptoms resolve have recurrent disease caused by relapse of the original infection or reinfection from external sources (2, 3, 4). In parallel with changes in strain prevalence and severity of disease, clinical response rates have changed with metronidazole during the last

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)0.112
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1120.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations22
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntimicrobial Agents and ChemotherapySame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207