ArticleInfection2014
Concordance of the SHEA-IDSA severity classification for Clostridium difficile infection and the ATLAS bedside scoring system in hospitalized adult patients.
Article in Infection, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Management of severe and fulminantJournal of medical microbiology · 2025Review
- Prediction of in-hospital mortality ofBMJ open gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Development and validation of a simple and robust model to predict 30-day mortality in patients withBMJ open gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Hypoalbuminemia as predictor of recurrence of Clostridium difficile infection.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2019Article
- Impact of the use of local fidaxomicin treatment algorithms for managing Clostridium difficile infection in hospitalized patients in southeastern United States.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2018Article
- Fecal microbiota transplantation for recurrentIntestinal research · 2018Article
- Correlation between fecal calprotectin levels, disease severity and the hypervirulent ribotype 027 strain in patients with Clostridium difficile infection.BMC infectious diseases · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America and Infectious Diseases Society of America (SHEA-IDSA) guidelines for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) recommend initial treatment of CDI based on disease severity. This severity definition has not been validated or evaluated based on clinical outcomes. The ATLAS scoring system is a validated tool useful in predicting treatment response and mortality in CDI. The main purpose of this study is to evaluate the concordance of the ATLAS scoring system and the SHEA-IDSA staging for CDI severity.
methodsThis was a retrospective study which included hospitalized patients with confirmed CDI. Bivariate analyses compared baseline demographics and clinical information between patients with nonsevere and severe CDI based on the SHEA-IDSA criteria for CDI severity. Kappa scores were calculated to compare the concordance of the two scoring systems in defining CDI severity. Sensitivity and specificity of the ATLAS scoring system to determine CDI severity were calculated using the SHEA-IDSA criteria as the reference standard.
resultsSixty-four patients met inclusion criteria. Of those, 62.5% were classified as mild to moderate CDI, 25% were severe, uncomplicated, and 12.5% were severe, complicated based on SHEA-IDSA criteria. In the bivariate analyses, ATLAS score breakpoints of ≥ 4, ≥ 5, and ≥ 6 revealed moderate agreement with the SHEA-IDSA classification for severity. The sensitivities and specificities for ATLAS scores in predicting CDI severity ranged from 58.3 to 87.5, and 67.5-87.5%, respectively.
conclusionThe ATLAS score may be useful in evaluating CDI severity and determining drug therapy selection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25129565What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.