Comparison of Clinical Severity Score Indices for <i>Clostridium difficile</i> Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare 8 severity score indices for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). DESIGN: Prospective observational study. METHODS: This study was conducted from July through October 2006. All hospitalized patients in 3 university-affiliated hospitals with a positive fecal Clostridium difficile toxin assay result were evaluated. Infection was considered severe if patients had at least 1 of the following clinical events during their hospitalization: (1) death attributed to CDI within 30 days after diagnosis, (2) colectomy necessitated by CDI, or (3) intensive care unit admission for management of complications attributed to CDI. Severity was assessed on the basis of 8 severity score indices, using published criteria for severe CDI as the benchmark. The 8 severity score indices studied were Beth Israel, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center version 1, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center version 2, Hines VA, modified University of Illinois, University of Calgary version 1, University of Calgary version 2, and University of Temple. RESULTS: Of 184 patients with CDI evaluated, 19 had severe cases and 165 had nonsevere cases, as assessed on the basis of the defined severe CDI criteria. Sensitivities of the 8 severity score indices studied ranged from 63.2% to 84.2%, and specificities ranged from 59.4% to 93.9%. The Hines VA index had the highest kappa score (0.69 [95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.83]), followed by the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center version 1 index. Independent risk factors for severe CDI determined by multivariate analysis were abdominal distention (P = .007), fever (temperature, 38.0°C or above; P = .042), white blood cell count of at least 20,000 cells/mm(3) (P = .035), and hypoalbuminemia (serum albumin level less than 3 mg/dL; P = .029). CONCLUSION: The Hines VA CDI severity score index appeared to display the strongest correlation for predicting more severe forms of 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 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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".