Risk Factors Associated with<i>Clostridium difficile</i>Infection in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Clostridium difficile infection [CDI] is a significant concern in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. Risk factors and consequences associated with CDI in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients are important to characterize. The aim of this research was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on risk factors and outcomes associated with CDI in IBD patients. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched for studies investigating risk factors, colectomy and mortality risk in IBD patients with and without CDI. This was stratified by short [<3 months] and long-term [>1 year] outcomes. Summary estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. Quality assessment used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies met inclusion criteria. Antibiotics use within 30 days of diagnosis was associated with CDIs (odds ratio [OR]: 1.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.36, 2.52). Colonic involvement in Crohn's disease patients was associated with significantly higher CDI rates [OR: 2.76, 95% CI: 1.75, 4.35]. There was a significant association between biologic medication use and CDI [OR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.18, 2.30], with minimal heterogeneity [I2 = 4.0%]. The long-term colectomy risk was significantly higher for IBD patients with CDI compared with that for IBD patients without CDI [OR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.17, 4.18]. Significantly higher mortality was found for CDI in IBD patients both short-term [OR: 3.84, 95% CI: 2.62, 5.61] and long-term [OR: 3.65, 95% CI: 1.58, 8.44]. Substantial heterogeneity existed. Most studies were of moderate quality. CONCLUSION: Colonic involvement, and biologic and antibiotic use appear to be risk factors associated with CDI among IBD patients. CDI is associated with increased short- and long-term mortality.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".