Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24611015›Full record

ReviewTherapeutics and clinical risk management2014

Epidemiology and risk factors for invasive candidiasis.

Nur Yapar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 270 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
270citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

270 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The novel second-generation triterpenoid SCY-247 maintainsAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026
    Article
  10. mBio · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Gut microbes · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Biotherapeutic Potential of Probiotic YeastIndian journal of microbiology · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

210 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Nur YaparDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The number of immunosuppressive patients has increased significantly in recent years. These patients are at risk for opportunistic infections, especially fungal infections. Candidiasis is one of the most frequent fungal infections determined in these immunosuppressive patients and its epidemiology has changed over the last two decades. Recently, new antifungal agents and new therapy strategies such as antifungal prophylaxis, secondary prophylaxis, and preemptive therapy have come into use. These changes resulted in the alteration of Candida species causing invasive infections. The incidence of Candida albicans was decreased in many countries, especially among patients with immunosuppressive disorders, while the incidence of species other than C. albicans was increased. In this review, incidence, risk factors, and species distribution of invasive candidiasis are discussed.

Indexed as

candidemiaincidenceinvasive candidiasisrisk factorsspecies distribution

Identifiers

PMID24611015
PMCPMC3928396

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.