Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16328556›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2005

Diagnosis of candidemia by polymerase chain reaction and blood culture: prospective study in a high-risk population and identification of variables associated with development of candidemia.

M S Moreira-Oliveira, Y Mikami, M Miyaji, T Imai, A Z Schreiber, M L Moretti

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Article
  4. World journal of plastic surgery · 2019
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Polymerase chain reaction-based assays for the diagnosis of invasive fungal infections.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2012
    Review
  13. Early identification of sepsis.Current infectious disease reports · 2010
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

M S Moreira-OliveiraInfectious Diseases Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Rua Alexandre Fleming, 40 Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, 13081-970, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Y Mikami
M Miyaji
T Imai
A Z Schreiber
M L Moretti
Chiba University · JPUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnosis of candidemia is important for prompt initiation of antifungal therapy. Two hundred twenty-five patients at high risk for candidemia who had blood cultures drawn and were hospitalized for more than 15 days were followed-up prospectively over a 2-year period. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and whole-blood cultures monitored by the automated BactAlert system (Organon Teknika, Durham, NC, USA) were used to detect candidemia in all patients hospitalized in high-risk areas for more than 15 days. DNA was extracted and amplified using ITS5 and ITS4 base pair primers, and the PCR products were sequenced for identification of Candida spp. A blood culture positive for Candida was considered the gold standard for diagnosis of candidemia. Variables associated with the development of candidemia diagnosed by positive blood culture were also evaluated in the patients. The overall mortality rate was 26.1%. Mortality in candidemic patients was 41.9% and in noncandidemic patients 22.5% (p = 0.009). PCR sensitivity and specificity were 72.1 and 91.2%, respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 65.9 and 93.2%, respectively. The logistic regression of the multivariate analysis showed that parenteral nutrition (p < 0.0001), fever (p = 0.01), neutropenia (p = 0.04), and an indwelling urinary catheter (p = 0.02) were significant variables associated with the development of candidemia. The PCR technique in conjunction with DNA sequencing was a helpful tool in the diagnosis of candidemia.

Indexed as

Polymerase Chain ReactionCandidaCandidiasisCross InfectionCulture MediaCulture TechniquesFungemiaHumansProspective StudiesRisk FactorsCulture Media

Identifiers

PMID16328556
OpenAlexW2078788694

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.