ArticleInfection2021
Screening paracoccidioidomycosis by double immunodiffusion test in a referred diagnostic center in Brazilian southeastern: an accessible tool.
Article in Infection, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endemic Mycoses for Pulmonary Clinicians: From Nodules to ARDS.CHEST pulmonary · 2025Review
- Evaluation of commercial immunodiffusion reagents for detecting serum anti-Paracoccidioides antibodies.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2024Article
- Development of a Multiplex qPCR Assay for Fast Detection and Differentiation of Paracoccidioidomycosis Agents.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Paracoccidioidomycosis: What We Know and What Is New in Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Exploring genetic diversity, population structure, and phylogeography inStudies in mycology · 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
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis article shows reports of the clinical-epidemiological characteristics and serological screening in patients assisted by a reference center for PCM care, University Hospital Cassiano Antonio Moraes, Federal University of Espirito Santo, Brazil.
methodsThe patient's sera with PCM were analyzed by DID test at the beginning and the end treatment. Clinical and demographic data were also collected to characterize the sample.
resultsOne hundred patients with a suspected diagnosis of PCM were evaluated. Serology by DID test was used as a screen in all patients. The test was positive for 79 patients (72 for Paracoccidioides brasiliensis and 7 for Paracoccidioides lutzii). Serology was negative in 21 sera, although all of them were diagnosed PCM by histopathologic or direct exam. Serological follow-up was performed during the treatment of all patients. After treatment, 58(58%) had negative serology and 33(33%) low levels of antibodies (≤ 1:16).
conclusionOur results indicate the importance of the DID test for the screening and monitoring of PCM and that the incidence of P. lutzii might be greater than expected in areas where it is not the predominant PCM species. Therefore, this article may contribute to improving the knowledge and clinical management about this disease.
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.