Diarrhea in the critically ill: definitions, epidemiology, risk factors and outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this paper, we review the current evidence with respect to definitions, risk factors, and outcomes of diarrhea in the critically ill and highlight research gaps in the literature. RECENT FINDINGS: Definitions of diarrhea in the intensive care unit (ICU) include the World Health Organization quantified as >3 liquid bowel movements per day and the Bristol Stool Chart score of 7. Diarrhea incidence is 37.7-73.8% and varies based on definition applied. Clostridioides difficile associated diarrhea (CDAD) is uncommon with an incidence of 2.2%. Risk factors for diarrhea include total number of antibiotics, enteral nutrition, and suppository use. The composition of enteral nutrition including high osmolarity and high fiber feeds contributed to diarrhea occurrence. Opiates decrease diarrhea incidence whereas probiotics have no effect on the incidence or duration of diarrhea. Outcomes of diarrhea include increased length of stay in the ICU and hospital, however its impact on mortality is unclear. SUMMARY: Diarrhea remains a common problem in clinical practice and attention must be paid to modifiable risk factors. Further research is needed on interventions to decrease its burden.
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 | 0.001 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".