MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7075692084

Key research issues in Clostridium difficile

2005· article· en· W7075692084 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed Central · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Resources Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClostridium difficileAntibiotic resistanceGeneral partnershipC difficileClinical microbiologyInfection controlPublic health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clostridium difficile is an emerging pathogen that causes C difficile-associated diarrhea, an important nosocomial infection. Control of this infection remains a challenge, and much needs to be determined about the antimicrobial resistance of the organism, antibiotic stewardship, contamination of the patient environment, and various host factors that determine susceptibility or resistance to infection. A national symposium focusing on C difficile infections, the Clostridium difficile Symposium on Emerging Issues and Research, was hosted on November 23, 2004, by the Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases at the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, in partnership with the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. This symposium, which aimed to summarize key research issues regarding C difficile infections in Canada, had the following objectives: to provide a forum for learning and discussion about C difficile and its impact on the health of Canadians; to identify the key research issues that should be addressed; and to explore potential research funding opportunities and collaboration. The present report summarizes key research issues identified for C difficile infections in Canada by addressing four major themes: diagnosis and surveillance, infection prevention and control, antibiotic stewardship, and clinical management.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed CentralSame topicWater Quality and Resources StudiesFrench-language works237,207