Established and potential risk factors for <i> clostridum difficile </i> infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clostridium difficile is the aetiological agent for almost all cases of pseudo membranous colitis and 15-25% of antibiotic associated diarrhoea. In recent years, C. difficile associated disease (CDAD) has been increasing in frequency and severity due to the emergence of virulent strains. Severe cases of toxic mega colon may be associated with mortality rates of 24-38%. The prevalence of CDAD is global and the incidence varies considerably from place to place. In the initial stages of its discovery, C. difficile infection was regarded mainly as an outcome of antibiotic intake and not as a life threatening disease. Intervention by man has produced conditions making C. difficile a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. The recent outbreak of CDAD in Quebec has sent the alarm bells ringing. Apart from a threefold increase in the incidence of CDAD, clinicians have also reported a higher number of cases involving toxic mega colon, colectomy or death. Among all the risk factors, inclusive of the host and the environmental factors, antibiotics are the most important ones. Surgical patients comprise 55-75% of all patients with CDAD due to the fact that perioperative prophylaxis requires the use of antibiotics. However, other drugs such as immunosuppressants and proton pump inhibitors are also important risk factors. Thus CDAD is a growing nosocomial and public health challenge. Additionally, the recognition of community acquired CDAD signals the presence of several risk factors. In this review, the established and potential risk factors of CDAD, along with the epidemiology, diagnostic modalities, management and preventive measures of the disease have been elaborated.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".