Chlorhexidine gluconate bathing in children with cancer or those undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A double‐blinded randomized controlled trial from the Children's Oncology Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To the authors' knowledge, information regarding whether daily bathing with chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) reduces central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) in pediatric oncology patients and those undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) is limited. METHODS: In the current multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients aged ≥2 months and <22 years with cancer or those undergoing allogeneic HCT were randomized 1:1 to once-daily bathing with 2% CHG-impregnated cloths or control cloths for 90 days. The primary outcome was CLABSI. Secondary endpoints included total positive blood cultures, acquisition of resistant organisms, and acquisition of cutaneous staphylococcal isolates with an elevated CHG mean inhibitory concentration. RESULTS: The study was stopped early because of poor accrual. Among the 177 enrolled patients, 174 were considered as evaluable (88 were randomized to the CHG group and 86 were randomized to the control group). The rate of CLABSI per 1000 central line days in the CHG group was 5.44 versus 3.10 in the control group (risk difference, 2.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-4.69 [P = .049]). Post hoc conditional power analysis demonstrated a 0.2% chance that the results would have favored CHG had the study fully enrolled. The rate of total positive blood cultures did not differ between groups (risk difference, 2.37; 95% confidence interval, -0.41 to 5.14 [P = .078]). The number of patients demonstrating the new acquisition of resistant organisms did not differ between groups (P = .54). Patients in the CHG group were found to be more likely to acquire cutaneous staphylococcal isolates with an elevated CHG mean inhibitory concentration (P = .032). CONCLUSIONS: The data from the current study do not support the use of routine CHG bathing in children with cancer or those undergoing allogeneic HCT.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".