ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2017
Evaluation of Correlation between Pretest Probability for Clostridium difficile Infection and Clostridium difficile Enzyme Immunoassay Results.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety and Tolerability of SER-109 as an Investigational Microbiome Therapeutic in Adults With Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection: A Phase 3, Open-Label, Single-Arm Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Article
- Clostridium difficile: Diagnosis and the Consequence of Over Diagnosis.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2021Review
- The Role of Diagnostic Stewardship inCurrent infectious disease reports · 2020Article
- South African Society of Clinical MicrobiologySouthern African journal of infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Recent advances in the treatment ofFaculty reviews · 2020Review
- Metabolomic networks connect host-microbiome processes to human Clostridioides difficile infections.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2019Article
- Review
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
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized patients tested for Clostridium difficile and determine the correlation between pretest probability for C. difficile infection (CDI) and assay results. Patients with testing ordered for C. difficile were enrolled and assigned a high, medium, or low pretest probability of CDI based on clinical evaluation, laboratory, and imaging results. Stool was tested for C. difficile by toxin enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and toxigenic culture (TC). Chi-square analyses and the log rank test were utilized. Among the 111 patients enrolled, stool samples from nine were TC positive and four were EIA positive. Sixty-one (55%) patients had clinically significant diarrhea, 19 (17%) patients did not, and clinically significant diarrhea could not be determined for 31 (28%) patients. Seventy-two (65%) patients were assessed as having a low pretest probability of having CDI, 34 (31%) as having a medium probability, and 5 (5%) as having a high probability. None of the patients with low pretest probabilities had a positive EIA, but four were TC positive. None of the seven patients with a positive TC but a negative index EIA developed CDI within 30 days after the index test or died within 90 days after the index toxin EIA date. Pretest probability for CDI should be considered prior to ordering C. difficile testing and must be taken into account when interpreting test results. CDI is a clinical diagnosis supported by laboratory data, and the detection of toxigenic C. difficile in stool does not necessarily confirm the diagnosis of CDI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.