Health Care–Associated<i>Clostridium difficile</i>Infection in Canada: Patient Age and Infecting Strain Type Are Highly Predictive of Severe Outcome and Mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: C. difficile infection (CDI) has become an important and frequent nosocomial infection, often resulting in severe morbidity or death. Severe CDI is more frequently seen among individuals infected with the emerging NAP1/027/BI (NAP1) strain and in the elderly population, but the relative importance of these 2 factors remains unclear. We used a large Canadian database of patients with CDI to explore the interaction between these 2 variables. METHODS: The Canada-wide CDI study, performed in 2005 by the Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program (CNISP), was used to analyze the role of infecting strain type and patient age on the severity of CDI. A severe outcome was defined as CDI requiring intensive care unit care, colectomy, or causing death (directly or indirectly) within 30 days after diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 1008 patients in the CNISP database had both complete clinical data and infecting strain analysis documented. A total of 311 patients (31%) were infected with the NAP1 strain, 83 (28%) were infected with the NAP2/J strain, and the rest were infected with various other types. The proportion of NAP1 infections correlated with the incidence and the severity of CDI when analyzed by province. Thirty-nine (12.5%) of the infections due to the NAP1 strain resulted in a severe outcome, compared with only 41 (5.9%) of infections due to the other types (P < .001). The patient's age was strongly associated with a severe outcome, and patients 60-90 years of age were approximately twice as likely to experience a severe outcome if the infection was due to NAP1, compared with infections due to other types. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms the strong age association with infection due to the NAP1 strain and severe CDI. In addition, patients 60-90 years of age infected with NAP1 are approximately twice as likely to die or to experience a severe CDI-related outcome, compared with those with non-NAP1 infections. Patients >90 years of age experience high rates of severe CDI, regardless of strain type.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".