ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2009
Rapid detection of vaginal Candida species by newly developed immunochromatography.
Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Establishment of a latex immunochromatography for detecting bovine early pregnancy-related glycoproteins.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Non-culture based assays for the detection of fungal pathogens.Journal de mycologie medicale · 2018Review
- Development of an immunochromatographic strip for simple detection of penicillin-binding protein 2'.Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI · 2011Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For the diagnosis of vulvovaginal candidiasis, we developed a simple immunochromatographic method that enables the detection of vaginal Candida spp. within about 30 min. Overall, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of this method appeared to be 80.3, 99.3, 98.0, and 92.0%, respectively.
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.