Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10422269›Full record

ArticleMycopathologia

In vitro activity of antimycotic agents determined by E-test method against vaginal Candida species.

R C Candido, M R Toloi, S A Franceschini, F R Garcia, E C Minto

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Mycopathologia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 45% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

R C CandidoDepartamento de Análises Clínicas, Toxicológicas e Bromatológicas da Faculdade de Ciências Farmacêuticas de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Brasil. rcandido@gly.fcfrp.usp.br
M R Toloi
S A Franceschini
F R Garcia
E C Minto
Universidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaginal candidiasis continues to be a common cause of vaginal discharge, pruritus and other local complaints in women worldwide. Although numerous antimycotic agents are available for the treatment of yeast vaginitis there is little comparative data on the in vitro activity of these drugs. The objectives of this study were to isolate and identify the Candida species in the vagina and anus of patients treated in a gynaecology clinic, as well as determine the susceptibility to azolic compounds measured by the E-test method. Vaginal and rectal swabs were collected from 80 adult non-pregnant patients, seen at a gynaecological clinic, aged 18-59 years, with sexual activity, with and without vaginitis. The swabs were processed by methods routinely used for the detection of pathogenic yeasts. The susceptibility of the isolates to fluconazole, ketoconazole and itraconazole, was measured by the agar diffusion method (E-test), using RPM1 1,640 medium with 2% glucose and phosphate buffer. Candida species (33) strains were isolated from 17 patients at similar proportions from both anatomical sites, and 12 patients harboured 24 strains of C. albicans in the vaginal and rectal tracts. Twenty one percent of the strains of C. albicans were resistant to ketoconazole, 54% were resistant to itraconazole and 0% were resistant to fluconazole. The sensitivity of strains isolated from the two sites were similar, indicating that these are strains of the same phenotype.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnal CanalAntifungal AgentsCandidaCandidiasis, VulvovaginalDrug Resistance, MicrobialFemaleHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMiddle AgedVaginaAntifungal Agents

Identifiers

PMID10422269
OpenAlexW9076682

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.