SynthesisPloS one2025
Trends in Clostridioides difficile infection prevalence among pediatric cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPediatric cancer patients are highly susceptible to Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) due to immunosuppression, prolonged hospitalization, and antibiotic exposure. This study determined the global pooled prevalence of CDI among pediatric cancer patients.
methodsAccording to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 20 available articles published between 1985 and 2024 were included in this study. The extracted data from the relevant articles were analyzed using STATA version 17.0. The effect size estimate was computed using a random-effects model, considering a 95% confidence interval. The I2 statistic and Galbraith plot were used to confirm heterogeneity. Univariate meta-regression, sensitivity, and subgroup analyses were conducted to identify the source of heterogeneity. Egger's test and a funnel plot were used to check for publication bias.
resultsThe pooled prevalence of CDI was 15.41% (95% CI: 10.57-20.24%), with high heterogeneity (I2 = 99.90%) and statistical significance (p < 0.001). The trend in the study year was a minimum prevalence of 0.96% in 2016-2020 (Brazil) and a maximum prevalence of 38.26% in 2007-2017 (USA). In the subgroup analysis, a relatively high prevalence of CDI was observed in Asia (23.23%; 95% CI: 17.44-29.01%) and prospective studies (20.64%; 95% CI: 14.25-27.03%), and studies included pediatric patients with hematologic, solid tumors, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients (18.34%; 95% CI: 8.05-28.63%). The test of group differences (p < 0.001) in the continent in subgroup analysis and sample size (p = 0.049) in univariate meta-regression were sources of heterogeneity between the effect sizes of the individual studies.
conclusionThere is a significant burden of CDI in pediatric cancer patients. These findings highlight the need for regular detection and targeted treatment of CDI, including drug-resistant strains, in cancer patients to minimize severe complications and mortality.
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.