Identification of antigens reacting with anti-Candida albicans germ tube antibodies.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Rapid identification of Candida dubliniensis by indirect immunofluorescence based on differential localization of antigens on C. dubliniensis blastospores and Candida albicans germ tubes.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1998
   Article
2. Detection of antibodies to Candida albicans germ tubes during experimental infections by different Candida species.Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology · 1998
   Article
3. Re-expression by Candida albicans germ tubes of antigens lost during subculture of blastospores.Mycopathologia · 1996
   Article
4. Characterization of Candida albicans cell wall antigens with monoclonal antibodies.Infection and immunity · 1993
   Article

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

Indexed as