ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2022
Validation of Clinical Risk Models for Clostridioides difficile
Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomarkers for Early Severity Prediction inMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Propensity-Matched Case Control Study of Anti-Interleukin-23 Therapies in Clostridioides difficile Infection.Research square · 2026Article
- Article
- Discordance in Clinical Indicators With Sequential Fecal Microbiota Transplantation: A Case of FulminantACG case reports journal · 2025Article
- Management of severe and fulminantJournal of medical microbiology · 2025Review
- Defining FulminantOpen forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Derivation and internal validation of the multivariate toxigenicAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2024Article
- Novel Biomarkers, IncludingInfection and immunity · 2023Article
- A Predictive Model to Identify ComplicatedOpen forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Clostridioides difficile is the leading health care-associated pathogen, leading to substantial morbidity and mortality; however, there is no widely accepted model to predict C. difficile infection severity. Most currently available models perform poorly or were calibrated to predict outcomes that are not clinically relevant. We sought to validate six of the leading risk models (Age Treatment Leukocyte Albumin Serum Creatinine (ATLAS), C. difficile Disease (CDD), Zar, Hensgens, Shivashankar, and C. difficile Severity Score (CDSS)), guideline severity criteria, and PCR cycle threshold for predicting C. difficile-attributable severe outcomes (inpatient mortality, colectomy/ileostomy, or intensive care due to sepsis). Models were calculated using electronic data available within ±48 h of diagnosis (unavailable laboratory measurements assigned zero points), calibrated using a large retrospective cohort of 3,327 inpatient infections spanning 10 years, and compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and precision-recall curves. ATLAS achieved the highest area under the ROC curve (AuROC) of 0.781, significantly better than the next best performing model (Zar 0.745; 95% confidence interval of AuROC difference 0.0094-0.6222;
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.