ArticleCurrent infectious disease reports2014
Update on fungal diagnostics.
Article in Current infectious disease reports, 2014. 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Plasma Microbial Cell-free DNA Metagenomic Sequencing for Diagnosis of Invasive Fungal Diseases Among High-risk Outpatient and Inpatient Immunocompromised Hosts.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025Article
- Omics and Multiomics-Based Diagnostics for Invasive Candidiasis: Toward Precision Medicine.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2025Review
- Using IFN-γ antibodies to identify the pathogens of fungal rhinosinusitis: A novel immunohistochemical approach.Molecular medicine reports · 2018Article
- Comparative Evaluation of the BD Phoenix Yeast ID Panel and Remel RapID Yeast Plus System for Yeast Identification.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2016Article
- Application of Culture-Independent Rapid Diagnostic Tests in the Management of Invasive Candidiasis and Cryptococcosis.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2015Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Invasive fungal disease (IFD) is becoming more prevalent in transplant and oncology patients as a result of the potent immunosuppressive therapies used to prevent allograft rejection and/or the use of cytotoxic chemotherapy to treat cancer. Mortality attributable to IFD remains high despite advances in antifungal therapies. There is a continued need for laboratory diagnostics to help improve clinical outcomes. In recent years, culture-based detection strategies and histopathology have been supplemented with molecular and proteomic techniques as well as antigen detection methods. Refinements in these assays are improving the diagnosis of IFD, with the greatest strides made within the molecular and proteomic arenas. This review highlights recent laboratory developments in the diagnosis of invasive candidiasis, cryptococcosis, opportunistic molds, and endemic fungal infections.
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.