Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27614870›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2017

Critical review of current clinical practice guidelines for antifungal therapy in paediatric haematology and oncology.

Jessica E Morgan, Hadeel Hassan, Julia V Cockle, Christopher Lethaby, Beki James, Robert S Phillips

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Advances in the Treatment of Mycoses in Pediatric Patients.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Critical review of current clinical practice guidelines for antifungal therapy in paediatric haematology and oncology.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jessica E MorganCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK. jem539@york.ac.uk.
Hadeel HassanDepartment of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Great George Street, Leeds, LS1 3EX, UK.
Julia V CockleDepartment of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Great George Street, Leeds, LS1 3EX, UK.
Christopher LethabyDepartment of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Great George Street, Leeds, LS1 3EX, UK.
Beki JamesDepartment of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Great George Street, Leeds, LS1 3EX, UK.
Robert S PhillipsCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust · GBUniversity of York · GB

Funding

Department of Health PDF-2014-07-072Medical Research Council G0800472
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe incidence of invasive fungal disease (IFD) is rising, but its treatment in paediatric haematology and oncology patients is not yet standardised. This review aimed to critically appraise and analyse the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that are available for paediatric IFD.

methodsElectronic searches of MEDLINE, MEDLINE in-Process & Other non-Indexed Citations, the Guidelines International Network (GIN), guideline.gov and Google were performed and combined fungal disease (Fung* OR antifung*OR Candida* OR Aspergill*) with prophylaxis or treatment (prophyl* OR therap* OR treatment). All guidelines were assessed using the AGREE II tool and recommendations relating to prophylaxis, empirical treatment and specific therapy were extracted.

resultsNineteen guidelines met the inclusion criteria. The AGREE II scores for the rigour of development domain ranged from 11 to 92 % with a median of 53 % (interquartile range 32-69 %). Fluconazole was recommended as antifungal prophylaxis in all nine of the included guidelines which recommended a specific drug. Liposomal amphotericin B was recommended in all five guidelines giving empirical therapy recommendations. Specific therapy recommendations were given for oral or genital candidiasis, invasive candida infection, invasive aspergillosis and other mould infections.

conclusionsIn many areas, recommendations were clear about appropriate practice but further clarity was required, particularly relating to the decision to discontinue empirical antifungal treatment, the relative benefits of empiric and pre-emptive strategies and risk stratification. Future CPGs could consider working to published guideline production methodologies and sharing summaries of evidence appraisal to reduce duplication of effort, improving the quality and efficiency of CPGs in this area.

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsChildHematologyHumansMedical OncologyMycosesNeoplasmsPediatricsPractice Guidelines as TopicAntifungal AgentsCritical reviewFungal infectionGuidelinePaediatric

Identifiers

PMID27614870
OpenAlexW2515258867

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.