Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31506883›Full record

ArticleMycopathologia2019

Vitek

Dolores Pinheiro, Carolina Monteiro, Miguel A Faria, Eugénia Pinto

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Mycopathologia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  9. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dolores PinheiroLaboratory of Microbiology, Service of Clinical Pathology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de S. João, Alameda Prof. Hernâni Monteiro, 4200-319, Porto, Portugal. m.dolores.pinheiro@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5525-0213
Carolina MonteiroLaboratory of Microbiology, Biological Sciences Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4168-5862
Miguel A FariaLAQV-REQUIMTE, Laboratory of Bromatology and Hydrology, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Rua de Jorge Viterbo Ferreira 228, 4050-313, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9366-0443
Eugénia PintoLaboratory of Microbiology, Biological Sciences Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2948-5809
Universidade do Porto · PTHospital de São João · PT

Funding

FCT/MCTES (PIDDAC) and ERDF through the COMPETE-POFC programme UID/Multi/04423/2013FoodNanoHealth (NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000011) NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Infections caused by filamentous fungi are rising in incidence and became a serious health concern. Their rapid and reliable identification in the clinical laboratory is essential for an early and accurate diagnosis to guide timely therapy. Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) has been reported as a rapid and reliable method for identification of bacteria and yeasts isolated from clinical samples. However, it has less used for molds identification. The aim of this study was to evaluate Vitek

Indexed as

Diagnostic Tests, RoutineFungiHumansMicrobiological TechniquesMycosesSensitivity and SpecificitySpectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-IonizationClinical and environmental isolatesFilamentous fungi identificationMALDI-TOF MSMolecular biology

Identifiers

PMID31506883
OpenAlexW2972800182

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.