ArticleClinical and experimental gastroenterology2021
Article in Clinical and experimental gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Literature Review on Risk Factors for and Timing of Clostridioides difficile Infection in the United States.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2024Review
- Disordered Intestinal Microbial Communities DuringFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose
methodsA retrospective observational study was conducted in hospitalized patients with CDI diagnosed via a 2-step method - glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxin polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Patients with liver cirrhosis were identified based on ICD codes and chart review. MELD and CPT scores were calculated using laboratory parameters at the time of hospitalization. We compared CDI-related mortality in patients with and without cirrhosis and reviewed the CDI severity distribution in cirrhosis patients.
resultsA total of 526 patients were included in the study, of which 478 (90.87%) were non-cirrhotic and 48 (9.13%) were cirrhotic patients. Mortality rate was higher in cirrhosis group compared to the non-cirrhosis group (39.6% vs. 14.6%,P = 0.001). Among cirrhosis patients, those who survived had lower MELD score compared to the expired group (14.9 vs. 18.58, P = 0.106). There was no correlation of mortality based on CPT score in the cirrhosis group (P = 0.062). In post hoc analysis comparing the severity of CDI to liver cirrhosis, cirrhosis patients are more likely to present with severe-complicated disease. Multivariate logistic regression identified liver cirrhosis, severe-complicated CDI and serum albumin level as independent predictors of mortality.
conclusionOur study noted a more severe disease presentation and higher mortality in patients with cirrhosis admitted with CDI. Further studies are required for better understanding of the clinical course of CDI in cirrhosis and to evaluate the need for early intervention in this patient group.
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.