Incidence and Costs of Clostridium difficile Infections in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Limited data are available on direct medical costs and lost productivity due to Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in Canada. Methods. We developed an economic model to estimate the costs of managing hospitalized and community-dwelling patients with CDI in Canada. The number of episodes was projected based on publicly available national rates of hospital-associated CDI and the estimate that 64% of all CDI is hospital-associated. Clostridium difficile infection recurrences were classified as relapses or reinfections. Resource utilization data came from published literature, clinician interviews, and Canadian CDI surveillance programs, and this included the following: hospital length of stay, contact with healthcare providers, pharmacotherapy, laboratory testing, and in-hospital procedures. Lost productivity was considered for those under 65 years of age, and the economic impact was quantified using publicly available labor statistics. Unit costs were obtained from published sources and presented in 2012 Canadian dollars. Results. There were an estimated 37 900 CDI episodes in Canada in 2012; 7980 (21%) of these were relapses, out of a total of 10 900 (27%) episodes of recurrence. The total cost to society of CDI was estimated at $281 million; 92% ($260 million) was in-hospital costs, 4% ($12 million) was direct medical costs in the community, and 4% ($10 million) was due to lost productivity. Management of CDI relapses alone accounted for $65.1 million (23%). Conclusions. The largest proportion of costs due to CDI in Canada arise from extra days of hospitalization. Interventions reducing the severity of infection and/or relapses leading to rehospitalizations are likely to have the largest absolute effect on direct medical costs.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".