MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017652741 · doi:10.5217/ir.2014.12.4.266

Risk Factors for Delayed Recurrence of<i>Clostridium difficile</i>Infection

2014· article· en· W2017652741 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ji Won Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueIntestinal Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClostridium difficileIncidence (geometry)DiarrheaPseudomembranous colitisInternal medicineAntibioticsConcomitantPediatricsMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) is an anaerobic, gram-positive, spore-forming bacterium, and C. difficile infection (CDI) is a common cause of infectious diarrhea and pseudomembranous colitis. The incidence of CDI is increasing worldwide, most likely as a result of the increased use of antibiotics, and the subsequent emergence of hypervirulent strains.1 In Western countries, the incidence and severity of CDI are also increasing.2 Furthermore, recent reports suggest that in Asian countries, C. difficile is more prevalent than previously thought, and that the incidence of CDI is also increasing significantly in Korea.3,4 Recurrent CDI occurs either due to relapse (persistence of the same strain of C. difficile) or reinfection (acquisition of a new strain of C. difficile). The impact of recurrent CDI is significant because it influences the length of hospitalization and the cost of treatment.5 In a Canadian study of hospitalized patients, the independent predictors of recurrent CDI were found to be old age, acquisition of CDI during a hospital stay, and length of hospital stay.6 In a recent meta-analysis conducted by Garey et al., continued use of antibiotics after diagnosis, concomitant antacid medication, and old age were significant predictors of recurrent CDI.7 The risk factors associated with recurrent CDI have been investigated in some studies conducted in Korea.8,9,10 In a study by Kim et al., of 125 patients that developed C. difficile-associated diarrhea, 27 patients (21.6%) experienced one or more recurrence, and the risk factors for the CDI recurrence were identified as advanced age (over 65 years), a serum albumin level below 2.5 g/dL, and concurrent use of proton pump inhibitors.8 Jung et al. suggested that a history of surgery is a predictor of recurrence after metronidazole treatment of CDI.9 In a study by Ryu et al., patients who received tube feeding were at an increased risk of recurrent CDI.10 However, in these studies, the recurrence of CDI was evaluated only between weeks and 90 days only. In the present study,11 the authors investigated the long-term clinical outcomes of CDI in hospitalized patients in a single center. The authors evaluated delayed CDI recurrence after eight weeks of successful treatment response. The predictive factors associated with delayed CDI recurrence were tube feeding, and the use of anti-gastric acid medications. Tube feeding is a known risk factor for CDI because it can act as a transmission factor for C. difficile. Aseptic control of the feeding tube may aid in reducing contamination, and therefore preventing CDI. Another important result of this study is the mortality rate of patients with CDI. Although no deaths were attributed to CDI, the results of this study suggest that CDI may predict the poor prognosis of underlying diseases. As the authors mentioned, this study was limited in that it was retrospective, performed in a single center, and the hypervirulent strain was not evaluated appropriately. Another weak point of this study is that antacid medication history was not clearly defined. It would have been better if the authors had clarified the temporal relationship between antacid exposure and the development of diarrheal symptoms. In conclusion, risk factors for delayed recurrence of CDI were identified in the present paper. This study suggests that more sanitary manipulation of feeding tubes may prevent the recurrence of CDI. Further prospective studies with a large number of patients are needed to more accurately elucidate the factors associated with recurrent CDI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntestinal ResearchSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207