Integrating Time-Varying and Ecological Exposures into Multivariate Analyses of Hospital-Acquired Infection Risk Factors: A Review and Demonstration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) develop rapidly after brief and transient exposures, and ecological exposures are central to their etiology. However, many studies of HAIs risk do not correctly account for the timing of outcomes relative to exposures, and they ignore ecological factors. We aimed to describe statistical practice in the most cited HAI literature as it relates to these issues, and to demonstrate how to implement models that can be used to account for them. METHODS We conducted a literature search to identify 8 frequently cited articles having primary outcomes that were incident HAIs, were based on individual-level data, and used multivariate statistical methods. Next, using an inpatient cohort of incident Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), we compared 3 valid strategies for assessing risk factors for incident infection: a cohort study with time-fixed exposures, a cohort study with time-varying exposures, and a case-control study with time-varying exposures. RESULTS Of the 8 studies identified in the literature scan, 3 did not adjust for time-at-risk, 6 did not assess the timing of exposures in a time-window prior to outcome ascertainment, 6 did not include ecological covariates, and 6 did not account for the clustering of outcomes in time and space. Our 3 modeling strategies yielded similar risk-factor estimates for CDI risk. CONCLUSIONS Several common statistical methods can be used to augment standard regression methods to improve the identification of HAI risk factors. Infect.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".