Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36111240›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2022

Systematic review of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Clostridioides difficile infection.

Ting Gu, Wen Li, Li-Li Yang, Si-Min Yang, Qian He, Hai-Yu He, Da-Li Sun

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Comprehensive review ofWorld journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Toxins · 2024
    Review
  7. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  8. Host Immune Responses toTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ting GuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University/Second Faculty of Clinical Medicine, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Wen LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University/Second Faculty of Clinical Medicine, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Li-Li YangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University/Second Faculty of Clinical Medicine, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Si-Min YangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University/Second Faculty of Clinical Medicine, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Qian HeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University/Second Faculty of Clinical Medicine, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Hai-Yu HeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University/Second Faculty of Clinical Medicine, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Da-Li SunDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University/Second Faculty of Clinical Medicine, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To systematically assess the current related methodological quality of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), revealing the heterogeneity and reasons for guideline recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI. Methods: We searched electronic databases systematically between 2017 and 2021 to find the latest guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used for quality assessment of the included guidelines. The main recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI in the guidelines were extracted and evaluated for consistency, and the level of evidence supporting these recommendations was further extracted and analysed. Results: Fourteen guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI were finally included in this study. There were four guidelines, BSG and HIS, ASCRS, IDSA AND SHEA, and NICE, with an overall score of more than 60%, which is worthy of clinical recommendation. Further analysis of the consistency of the main recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI in the guidelines showed that the recommendations differed among guidelines. There are no unified classification criteria for the severity of CDI in current studies; some recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI do not provide evidence to support the recommendations, most recommendations cite low levels of evidence, and there is a lack of high-quality research evidence. Conclusion: The quality of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI is uneven. Recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of CDI have also varied in the guidelines for the past 5 years. Improvements of the aforementioned factors associated with causing heterogeneity would be a rational approach by guideline developers to further update guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI.

Indexed as

Clostridium InfectionsHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicCDIclostridioides difficile infectiondiagnosisguidelinestreatment

Identifiers

PMID36111240
PMCPMC9468422

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.