ArticleCurrent medical mycology2017
Isolation and molecular characterization of
Article in Current medical mycology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cryptococcus albidus (Naganishia albida) meningitis in a young patient with T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.Access microbiology · 2025Article
- A fungal protein organizes both glycogen and cell wall glucans.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Blap-6, a Novel Antifungal Peptide from the Chinese Medicinal BeetleInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Natural compounds from freshwater mussels disrupt fungal virulence determinants and influence fluconazole susceptibility in the presence of macrophages inMicrobiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Cryptococcus spp. and Cryptococcosis: focusing on the infection in Brazil.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2022Review
- Search forJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- HOG1 has an essential role in the stress response, virulence and pathogenicity ofExperimental and therapeutic medicine · 2021Article
- Comparison ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeMATERIALS AND
methodsTwo hundred and seventy-four specimens were collected from pigeon nests and
resultsThirty-three out of 186 cultures (17.7%) and 11 out of 88 cultures (12.5%) were positive among pigeon nest and
conclusionThe presence of pigeons and
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.