A Predominantly Clonal Multi-Institutional Outbreak of<i>Clostridium difficile</i>–Associated Diarrhea with High Morbidity and Mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In March 2003, several hospitals in Quebec, Canada, noted a marked increase in the incidence of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. METHODS: In 2004 we conducted a prospective study at 12 Quebec hospitals to determine the incidence of nosocomial C. difficile-associated diarrhea and its complications and a case-control study to identify risk factors for the disease. Isolates of C. difficile were typed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and analyzed for binary toxin genes and partial deletions in the toxin A and B repressor gene tcdC. Antimicrobial susceptibility was evaluated in a subgroup of isolates. RESULTS: A total of 1703 patients with 1719 episodes of nosocomial C. difficile-associated diarrhea were identified. The incidence was 22.5 per 1000 admissions. The 30-day attributable mortality rate was 6.9 percent. Case patients were more likely than matched controls to have received fluoroquinolones (odds ratio, 3.9; 95 percent confidence interval, 2.3 to 6.6) or cephalosporins (odds ratio, 3.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 2.2 to 6.6). A predominant strain, resistant to fluoroquinolones, was found in 129 of 157 isolates (82.2 percent), and the binary toxin genes and partial deletions in the tcdC gene were present in 132 isolates (84.1 percent). CONCLUSIONS: A strain of C. difficile that was resistant to fluoroquinolones and had binary toxin and a partial deletion of the tcdC gene was responsible for this outbreak of C. difficile-associated diarrhea. Exposure to fluoroquinolones or cephalosporins was a risk factor.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".