The Epidemiology and Economic Burden of<i>Clostridium difficile</i>Infection in Korea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence of Clostridium difficile infection and the associated burden have recently increased in many countries. While the main risk factors for C. difficile infection include old age and antibiotic use, the prevalence of this infection is increasing in low-risk groups. These trends highlight the need for research on C. difficile infection. This study pointed out the prevalence and economic burden of C. difficile infection and uses the representative national data which is primarily from the database of the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, for 2008-2011. The annual economic cost was measured using a prevalence approach, which sums the costs incurred to treat C. difficile infection. C. difficile infection prevalence was estimated to have increased from 1.43 per 100,000 in 2008 to 5.06 per 100,000 in 2011. Moreover, mortality increased from 69 cases in 2008 to 172 in 2011. The economic cost increased concurrently, from $2.4 million in 2008 to $7.6 million, $10.5 million, and $15.8 million in 2009, 2010, and 2011, respectively. The increasing economic burden of C. difficile infection over the course of the study period emphasizes the need for intervention to minimize the burden of a preventable illness like C. difficile infection.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".