<i>Clostridium difficile</i>Infection Worsens the Prognosis of Ulcerative Colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of Clostridium difficile infections among ulcerative colitis (UC) patients is well characterized. However, there is little knowledge regarding the association between C difficile infections and postoperative complications among UC patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether C difficile infection is associated with undergoing an emergent colectomy and experiencing postoperative complications. METHODS: The present population-based case-control study identified UC patients admitted to Calgary Health Zone hospitals for a flare between 2000 and 2009. C difficile toxin tests ordered in hospital or 90 days before hospital admission were provided by Calgary Laboratory Services (Calgary, Alberta). Hospital records were reviewed to confirm diagnoses and to extract clinical data. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed among individuals tested for C difficile to examine the association between C difficile infection and emergent colectomy and diagnosis of any postoperative complications and, secondarily, an infectious postoperative complication. Estimates were presented as adjusted ORs with 95% CIs. RESULTS: C difficile was tested in 278 (58%) UC patients and 6.1% were positive. C difficile infection was associated with an increased risk for emergent colectomy (adjusted OR 3.39 [95% CI 1.02 to 11.23]). Additionally, a preoperative diagnosis of C difficile was significantly associated with the development of postoperative infectious complications (OR 4.76 [95% CI 1.10 to 20.63]). CONCLUSION: C difficile diagnosis worsened the prognosis of UC by increasing the risk of colectomy and postoperative infectious complications following colectomy. Future studies are needed to explore whether early detection and aggressive management of C difficile infection will improve UC outcomes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".