MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077176258 · doi:10.1093/cid/civ179

Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285, Lactobacillus casei LBC80R, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus CLR2 (Bio-K+): Characterization, Manufacture, Mechanisms of Action, and Quality Control of a Specific Probiotic Combination for Primary Prevention of Clostridium difficile Infection

2015· review· en· W2077176258 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Auclair, Martin Frappier, Mathieu Millette

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsBio-K+ International (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLactobacillus caseiProbioticLactobacillus rhamnosusAntibiotic-associated diarrheaLactobacillus acidophilusMedicineMicrobiologyClostridium difficileLactobacillusDiarrheaAntimicrobialSaccharomyces boulardiiAntibioticsBiologyFermentationBacteriaFood scienceGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A specific probiotic formulation composed of Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285, Lactobacillus casei LBC80R, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus CLR2 (Bio-K+) has been marketed in North America since 1996. The strains and the commercial products have been evaluated for safety, identity, gastrointestinal survival, and stability throughout shelf life. The capacity of both the fermented beverages and the capsules to reduce incidences of antibiotic-associated diarrhea and Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has been demonstrated in human clinical trials. Individual strains and the finished products have shown antimicrobial activity against C. difficile and toxin A/B neutralization capacity in vitro. The use of this specific probiotic formulation as part of a bundle of preventive measures to control CDI in healthcare settings is discussed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations67
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207