MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2998796543 · doi:10.36584/cjic.2019.009

Household hygiene advice for patients with Clostridium difficile: Summary of hospital practice in Ontario, Canada

2019· article· en· W2998796543 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Catherine Egan, Andria Jones‐Bitton, Jan M. Sargeant, J. Scott Weese

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Infection Control · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphConestoga College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHygieneClostridium difficileMedicineInfection controlFamily medicineTransmission (telecommunications)Environmental healthHealth careIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: While Clostridium difficile infection is a significant concern in healthcare settings, there is increasing evidence that transmission does not solely occur in hospitals and long-term care homes. Hospital patients are regularly discharged home following or during treatment, and it is likely that many excrete spores into their household environment, posing risks of reinfection to themselves and transmission of spores to others. Hence, recommendations on household hygiene might be important for control of C. difficile. The objective of this study was to investigate the information provided by Ontario hospitals to patients who have laboratory-confirmed symptomatic C. difficile infection with respect to household hygiene advice once they are discharged from hospital. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted between January and August 2018 and included an anonymous online survey, a website scan of Ontario hospitals, and a content analysis of information provided to patients on discharge. The survey was distributed to practicing infection control professionals in Ontario hospitals through the IPAC Canada listserv. One response per hospital corporation was accepted. Results: Responses were obtained from 46/145 (32%) Ontario hospital corporations. The majority (30/46; 65%) of respondents indicated they personally believed the household environment was important or very important in the transmission of C. difficile. Almost half (22/46; 48%) of respondents reported that their hospital had a policy to provide household hygiene advice to patients when discharged home. However, analysis of 31 hospital information sheets from the website scan identified that 27/31 (88%) contained a statement that suggested there is little risk of transmission in households, and only 2/31 (6.5%) provided the specific dilution of bleach that is known to be sporicidal. Conclusion: The household hygiene advice provided by Ontario hospitals downplayed the likelihood of transmission of C. difficile spores in household environments and described a level of hygiene that is likely inadequate to prevent transmission of C. difficile spores in the home. This may contribute to recurrent infection and colonization of household contacts.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Infection Control→Same topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research→French-language works237,207→