ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2001
Evaluation of Candida ID, a new chromogenic medium for fungal isolation and preliminary identification of some yeast species.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biodetection Strategies for Selective Identification of Candidiasis.Indian journal of microbiology · 2024Review
- Recurrent candida prosthetic endocarditis over fifteen years managed with medical therapy and four valvular surgeries: a case report and review of literature.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2015Review
- An evaluation of risk factors in pregnant women with Candida vaginitis and the diagnostic value of simultaneous vaginal and rectal sampling.Mycopathologia · 2011Article
- Evaluation of the new chromogenic medium Candida ID 2 for isolation and identification of Candida albicans and other medically important Candida species.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2006Article
- Candida colonization of the vagina in elderly residents of a long-term-care hospital.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2006Article
- Routine use of a commercial test, GLABRATA RTT, for rapid identification of Candida glabrata in six laboratories.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2004Article
- Routine use of a one minute trehalase and maltase test for the identification of Candida glabrata in four laboratories.Journal of clinical pathology · 2003Article
- Rapid identification of Candida glabrata with a new commercial test, GLABRATA RTT.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2003Article
- Rapid identification of Candida species by using nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and a statistical classification strategy.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2003Article
- Identification of Candida glabrata by a 30-second trehalase test.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2002Article
- Prospective evaluation of the new chromogenic medium Candida ID, in comparison with Candiselect, for isolation of molds and isolation and presumptive identification of yeast species.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2002Article
- Performance of candida ID, a new chromogenic medium for presumptive identification of Candida species, in comparison to CHROMagar Candida.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2001Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Candida ID, a new chromogenic medium, allows identification of Candida albicans (blue colonies) and preliminary identification into a group of four species (pink colonies). In comparison with Albicans ID2 and Sabouraud gentamicin chloramphenicol on 446 fungal strains, Candida ID allowed the isolation of more species than Albicans ID 2 (95.5% versus 91.2%).
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.