MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320493110 · doi:10.1111/zph.13032

Infrequent intrahousehold transmission of <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> between pet owners and their pets

2023· article· en· W4320493110 on OpenAlexaff
Laurel E. Redding, Gregory Habing, Vincent Tu, Kyle Bittinger, Jack O'Day, Preeti Pancholi, Shuhua Wang, Andrew J. Alexander, Brendan J. Kelly, J. Scott Weese, Jason W. Stull

Bibliographic record

VenueZoonoses and Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesOhio State UniversityUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsClostridioidesFecesTransmission (telecommunications)Clostridium difficile toxin ABiologyCATSC difficileClostridium difficileVeterinary medicineMicrobiologyInternal medicineMedicineAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Companion animals have been shown to carry Clostridioides difficile strains that are similar or identical to strains found in people, and a small number of studies have shown that pets carry genetically identical C. difficile isolates as their owners, suggesting inter-species transmission. However, the directionality of transmission is ultimately unknown, and the frequency with which animals acquire C. difficile following their owners' infection is unclear. The goal of this study was to assess how often pets belonging to people with C. difficile infection carry genetically related C. difficile isolates. We enrolled pet owners from two medical institutions (University of Pennsylvania Health System (UPHS) and The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center (OSUWMC)) who had diarrhoea with or without positive C. difficile assays and tested their faeces and their pets' faeces for C. difficile using both anaerobic culture and PCR assays. When microorganisms were obtained from both the owner and pet and had the same toxin profile or ribotype, isolates underwent genomic sequencing. Faecal samples were obtained from a total of 59 humans, 72 dogs and 9 cats, representing 47 complete households (i.e. where a sample was available from the owner and at least one pet). Of these, C. difficile was detected in 30 humans, 10 dogs and 0 cats. There were only two households where C. difficile was detected in both the owner and pet. In one of these households, the C. difficile isolates were of different toxin profiles/ribotypes (A+/B+ / RT 499 from the owner, A-/B- / RT PR22386 from the dog). In the other household, the isolates were genetically identical (one SNP difference). Interestingly, the dog from this household had recently received a course of antibiotics (cefpodoxime and metronidazole). Our findings suggest that inter-species transmission of C. difficile occurs infrequently in households with human C. difficile infections.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZoonoses and Public HealthSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207