ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2025
Clinician Management Preferences for
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Engaging Patient and Caregiver Partners in Codeveloping a Patient Educational Video for Improving Clostridioides difficile Infection Education: Participatory Co-Design Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- What should infectious diseases clinicians know about pharmacy benefit managers and their impact on our patients?Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The 2021 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) guidelines for Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to members of the IDSA Emerging Infections Network in May 2024, targeting ID physicians and healthcare professionals in the United States who manage adult CDI. The survey assessed treatment preferences, clinical practices, and barriers to accessing and prescribing CDI therapies. Results: Of the 500 respondents who reported treating CDI in the past year, 83% (417/500) indicated that vancomycin was their most frequently prescribed agent for initial, nonfulminant CDI. Additionally, 72% (357/498) reported that their institutional guidelines recommended vancomycin as the first-line agent. The most common barrier to fidaxomicin use was challenges with outpatient insurance coverage (82% [408/496]). Bezlotoxumab was available to 74% (370/500) of respondents, though 33% (165/497) indicated they do not use bezlotoxumab routinely. Most clinicians (87% [437/500]) had previously recommended fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for recurrent CDI, though only 48% (239/500) had current access to FMT using donor stool. Fecal microbiota live-jslm was available to 36% (179/500), and fecal microbiota spores live-brpk was available to 30% (150/500). Conclusions: Significant barriers, including high costs, insurance challenges, and limited availability of CDI therapies, impact clinical decision-making and adherence to guideline recommendations.
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.