ArticleCurrent medical mycology2015
Detection of fungi by conventional methods and semi-nested PCR in patients with presumed fungal keratitis.
Article in Current medical mycology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Bridging Gaps in Fungal Keratitis Management: Novel Diagnostics, Drug Delivery Systems, and Gene Therapies.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Fungitell (1,3)-β-D-glucan assay in tear samples for rapid diagnosis of fungal keratitis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- Diagnosis of Fungal Keratitis in Low-Income Countries: Evaluation of Smear Microscopy, Culture, and In Vivo Confocal Microscopy in Nepal.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Phylogenetic relationship ofIranian journal of microbiology · 2022Article
- Diagnostic armamentarium of infectious keratitis: A comprehensive review.The ocular surface · 2022Review
- First Report of a Case of Ocular Infection Caused byPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Biosensors and Diagnostics for Fungal Detection.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- An Omics Approach to Diagnosing or Investigating Fungal Keratitis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Review
- First case of fungal keratitis due toCurrent medical mycology · 2019Article
- Clinical features, diagnosis, and outcomes of rhino-orbito-cerebral mucormycosis- A retrospective analysis.Current medical mycology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeFungal keratitis is a suppurative, ulcerative, and sight-threatening infection of the cornea that sometimes leads to blindness. The aims of this study were: recuperating facilities for laboratory diagnosis, determining the causative microorganisms, and comparing conventional laboratory diagnostic tools and semi-nested PCR. MATERIALS AND
methodsSampling was conducted in patients with suspected fungal keratitis. Two corneal scrapings specimens, one for direct smear and culture and the other for semi- nested PCR were obtained.
resultsOf the 40 expected cases of mycotic keratitis, calcofluor white staining showed positivity in 25%, culture in 17.5%, KOH in 10%, and semi-nested PCR in 27.5%. The sensitivities of semi-nested PCR, KOH, and CFW were 57.1%, 28.5%, and 42% while the specificities were 78.7%, 94%, and 78.7%, respectively. The time taken for PCR assay was 4 to 8 hours, whereas positive fungal cultures took at least 5 to 7 days.
conclusionDue to the increasing incidence of fungal infections in people with weakened immune systems, uninformed using of topical corticosteroids and improper use of contact lens, fast diagnosis and accurate treatment of keratomycosis seems to be essential
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.