ReviewBioMed research international2013
Molecular fingerprints to identify Candida species.
Review in BioMed research international, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Swine abortion caused by Candida parapsilosis.The Journal of veterinary medical science · 2021Article
- Clonal evolution ofJournal of oral microbiology · 2021Article
- Posttreatment Antifungal Resistance among Colonizing Candida Isolates in Candidemia Patients: Results from a Systematic Multicenter Study.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2015Article
- Phylogenetic relationship of phosphate solubilizing bacteria according to 16S rRNA genes.BioMed research international · 2015Article
- Microsatellites in the genome of the edible mushroom, Volvariella volvacea.BioMed research international · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A wide range of molecular techniques have been developed for genotyping Candida species. Among them, multilocus sequence typing (MLST) and microsatellite length polymorphisms (MLP) analysis have recently emerged. MLST relies on DNA sequences of internal regions of various independent housekeeping genes, while MLP identifies microsatellite instability. Both methods generate unambiguous and highly reproducible data. Here, we review the results achieved by using these two techniques and also provide a brief overview of a new method based on high-resolution DNA melting (HRM). This method identifies sequence differences by subtle deviations in sample melting profiles in the presence of saturating fluorescent DNA binding dyes.
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.