↓ Skip to main content

The burden of clostridium difficile infection: estimates of the incidence of CDI from U.S. Administrative databases

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
The burden of clostridium difficile infection: estimates of the incidence of CDI from U.S. Administrative databases
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1501-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margaret A. Olsen, Yinong Young-Xu, Dustin Stwalley, Ciarán P. Kelly, Dale N. Gerding, Mohammed J. Saeed, Cedric Mahé, Erik R. Dubberke

Abstract

Many administrative data sources are available to study the epidemiology of infectious diseases, including Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), but few publications have compared CDI event rates across databases using similar methodology. We used comparable methods with multiple administrative databases to compare the incidence of CDI in older and younger persons in the United States. We performed a retrospective study using three longitudinal data sources (Medicare, OptumInsight LabRx, and Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database (SID)), and two hospital encounter-level data sources (Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) and Premier Perspective database) to identify CDI in adults aged 18 and older with calculation of CDI incidence rates/100,000 person-years of observation (pyo) and CDI categorization (onset and association). The incidence of CDI ranged from 66/100,000 in persons under 65 years (LabRx), 383/100,000 in elderly persons (SID), and 677/100,000 in elderly persons (Medicare). Ninety percent of CDI episodes in the LabRx population were characterized as community-onset compared to 41 % in the Medicare population. The majority of CDI episodes in the Medicare and LabRx databases were identified based on only a CDI diagnosis, whereas almost ¾ of encounters coded for CDI in the Premier hospital data were confirmed with a positive test result plus treatment with metronidazole or oral vancomycin. Using only the Medicare inpatient data to calculate encounter-level CDI events resulted in 553 CDI events/100,000 persons, virtually the same as the encounter proportion calculated using the NIS (544/100,000 persons). We found that the incidence of CDI was 35 % higher in the Medicare data and fewer episodes were attributed to hospital acquisition when all medical claims were used to identify CDI, compared to only inpatient data lacking information on diagnosis and treatment in the outpatient setting. The incidence of CDI was 10-fold lower and the proportion of community-onset CDI was much higher in the privately insured younger LabRx population compared to the elderly Medicare population. The methods we developed to identify incident CDI can be used by other investigators to study the incidence of other infectious diseases and adverse events using large generalizable administrative datasets.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 22%
Other 8 14%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Professor 4 7%
Other 12 21%
Unknown 10 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 34%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 17 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 04 May 2016.
All research outputs
#6,351,980
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,974
of 7,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,574
of 298,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#35
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,687 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 298,997 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.