ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2020
Comparison of Four Methods for the
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trichophyton indotineae: Epidemiology, antifungal resistance and antifungal stewardship strategies.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026Review
- Dermatophyte-Selective Imidazole-Thiosemicarbazides: Potent In Vitro Activity AgainstInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Development of an agar-based screening method for terbinafine, itraconazole, and amorolfine susceptibility testing ofJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- Dermatophytic Biofilms: Characteristics, Significance and Treatment Approaches.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Honokiol and Magnolol: Insights into Their Antidermatophytic Effects.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Apiaceae Essential Oils: Boosters of Terbinafine Activity against Dermatophytes and Potent Anti-Inflammatory Effectors.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesInfections caused by dermatophytes affect a high percentage of the population. Antifungal susceptibility testing (AST) can offer useful information about the susceptibility profiles of the pathogens as well as the concomitant documentation of the appropriate treatment. However, the slow growth rate of these fungi and their poor sporulation are factors that can delay and affect the performance of the AST. The proposed methods by the CLSI or the EUCAST are both laborious for the everyday routine. There are alternative applications which propose the use of an inoculum, consisting of a conidia-mycelium mixture or even plain mycelia, as well as the use of resazurin in order to facilitate the reading. The aim of this study was to compare these approaches to the EUCAST method and evaluate their performance.
methodsThree alternative methods were compared to the EUCAST proposed methodology for conidia forming molds. The last was defined as the reference method. The methods under evaluation were (a) a fragmented mycelia method, (b) the EUCAST method with the addition of resazurin sodium salt solution and (c) the fragmented mycelia method with the addition of resazurin sodium salt solution. Twenty-two isolates (8
resultsThe essential agreement between the methods was calculated in percentages and a statistical analysis of the results was performed. Data evaluation revealed sufficient overall agreement of the methods with the addition of resazurin to the initial "uncolored" methods (98.9 and 97.5% for the EUCAST and the fragmented mycelia methods, respectively). The fragmented mycelia method exhibited a relatively sufficient overall agreement in comparison to the EUCAST method (90%) and not a satisfactory correlation, probably as a result of various issues of standardization.
conclusionThe EUCAST method was found to be the more reliable one, whereas the addition of resazurin sodium salt solution facilitates the reading and provides a reliable and objective evaluation. The fragmented mycelia method could serve as an alternative that should be applied only in cases of poor or no sporulating dermatophytes.
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.