↓ Skip to main content

Clostridium difficile infection health disparities by race among hospitalized adults in the United States, 2001 to 2010

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Clostridium difficile infection health disparities by race among hospitalized adults in the United States, 2001 to 2010
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1788-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacqueline R. Argamany, Andrew Delgado, Kelly R. Reveles

Abstract

Recognition of health disparities in Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is an initial step toward improved resource utilization and patient health. The purpose of this study was to identify health disparities by black vs. white race among hospitalized adults with CDI in the United States (U.S.) over 10 years. This was a retrospective analysis of the U.S. National Hospital Discharge Surveys from 2001 to 2010. Eligible cases included adults with an ICD-9-CM code for CDI (008.45). Patients with missing race or "other race" were excluded. The primary outcome, CDI incidence, was calculated as CDI discharges per 1,000 total discharges. Data weights were used to determine national estimates. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and severe CDI. Comparisons were made using bivariable analyses. Race was assessed as an independent risk factor for CDI outcomes using logistic regression or proportional hazards models. These data represent 1.7 million CDI discharges, where 90 % of patients were identified as white and 10 % black. Blacks differed from whites with respect to all baseline characteristics (p <0.0001). CDI incidence was significantly higher in whites compared to blacks (7.7/1,000 discharges vs. 4.9/1,000 discharges, p < 0.0001). Blacks had higher mortality (7.4 % vs. 7.2 %, p < 0.0001), LOS >7 days (57 % vs. 52 %, p < 0.0001), and severe CDI (24 % vs. 19 %, p < 0.0001). In multivariable analyses, black race was a positive predictor of mortality (OR 1.12, 95 % CI 1.09-1.15) and severe CDI (OR 1.09, 95 % CI 1.07-1.11), and negative predictor for hospital LOS (OR 0.93, 95 % CI 0.93-0.94). CDI incidence was higher for white patients; however, black race was independently associated with mortality and severe CDI.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 20%
Student > Master 5 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Other 3 12%
Librarian 2 8%
Other 6 24%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 60%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 2 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 September 2016.
All research outputs
#598,278
of 11,701,096 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#113
of 4,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,582
of 259,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#4
of 204 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,701,096 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,374 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 259,897 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 204 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.