Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33804805›Full record

ArticleJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Validation of the

Philipp Foessleitner, Herbert Kiss, Julia Deinsberger, Julia Ott, Lorenz Zierhut, Alex Farr

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Philipp FoessleitnerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Obstetrics and Feto-Maternal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-8409-1119
Herbert KissDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Obstetrics and Feto-Maternal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.
Julia DeinsbergerSkin and Endothelium Research Division (SERD), Department of Dermatology, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-4237-1526
Julia OttDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Obstetrics and Feto-Maternal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.
Lorenz ZierhutDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Obstetrics and Feto-Maternal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.
Alex FarrDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Obstetrics and Feto-Maternal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-4628-9052
Medical University of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pregnant women have an increased risk of vulvovaginal candidosis. Recurrent candidosis is under debate as a contributor to preterm birth, and vertical transmission may cause diaper dermatitis and oral thrush in the newborn. Apart from cultural methods, the gold standard for diagnosing candidosis is Gram staining, which is time-consuming and requires laboratory facilities. The objective of this prospective study was to validate a point-of-care vaginal yeast detection assay (

Indexed as

antenatal careCandidapoint-of-care testpregnancyvulvovaginal candidosis

Identifiers

PMID33804805
PMCPMC8003914
OpenAlexW3136157346

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.