MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754735263 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofx163.1814

Clostridium difficile Molecular Epidemiology in a Prospective Cohort of Canadian Children Compared with Cases of C. difficile Infection

2017· article· en· W2754735263 on OpenAlexaffabout
Colin Lloyd, Brendon Parsons, Tim Du, George R. Golding, Bonita E. Lee, Linda Chui, Stephen B. Freedman

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's HospitalPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClostridium difficileMedicineClostridium difficile toxin ARibotypingPulsed-field gel electrophoresisProspective cohort studyEpidemiologyMolecular epidemiologyCohortClostridium difficile toxin BMicrobiologyCarriageInternal medicinePediatricsAntibioticsPolymerase chain reactionGenotypeBiologyGenePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clostridium difficile is a notorious nosocomial pathogen, but little is known regarding the colonization commonly observed in children. It is suspected that C. difficile carriage in infants is a reservoir for toxigenic strains. To test this hypothesis, we sought to determine the genetic relatedness between a prospective cohort of C. difficile toxin gene positive healthy children and those with acute gastroenteritis (AGE) and strains identified in adult and pediatric C. difficile infection (CDI) cases from Alberta, Canada. Additionally, we compared C. difficile toxin production in healthy and AGE children. C. difficile was cultured from 97 hospitalized CDI cases (n = 79 adult; n = 18 pediatric) from stool samples tested positive for toxigenic C. difficile by C.DIFF QUIK CHEK COMPLETE® enzyme immunoassay (EIA) in 2015 and samples tested positive for toxin genes by the Luminex xTAG® Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel from a prospective cohort of 59 children with AGE seeking care at the emergency department and 17 healthy children attending public health clinics. Isolates were then characterized by PCR-ribotyping, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), PCR of the tcdA, tcdB, tcdC, and cdtB genes and C. difficile toxigenicity by EIA for a subset of 14 healthy and 45 AGE children. Ribotype 106 was predominant among all pediatric isolates (n = 21, 27.6% AGE and healthy children; n = 5, 27.8% pediatric CDI) and ribotype 027 in adult CDIs (n = 35, 44.3%). Eighteen ribotypes were shared between children and CDI cases (n = 134, 77.5%). Sixteen unique ribotype and PFGE patterns (n = 84, 48.6%) were identified in two or more cohorts. Similar toxin gene profiles were observed across the three cohorts, but adult CDI isolates had a higher proportion of binary toxin positive isolates (n = 42, 53.2%) compared with children (n = 3, 3.95%) and pediatric CDI (n = 0). C. difficile toxigenicity was similar (P = 0.23) amongst the subset of healthy (n = 6, 42.9%) and AGE (n = 28, 62.2%) children. Production of C. difficile toxins in children was not significantly associated with symptoms of AGE. C. difficile strains found in children were similar to those from CDI cases; especially pediatric cases. This suggests that strains might be shared, but the development of CDI may be related to factors other than C. difficile strain type. All authors: No reported disclosures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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