Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37051439›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in infectious disease

Flucytosine and its clinical usage.

L Shamithra M Sigera, David W Denning

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in infectious disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed
13.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. RethinkingVaccines · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Pharmacological assessment of drugs retained in the 1Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

L Shamithra M SigeraDivision of Infection, Immunity & Respiratory Medicine, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5519-7619
David W DenningDivision of Infection, Immunity & Respiratory Medicine, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
University of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Flucytosine is an antifungal agent first licensed in the 1970's. However, its clinical value has long been overlooked and its availability across the globe is limited. This review highlights the important clinical and pharmacological aspects of flucytosine. This a narrative review of the clinical and

Indexed as

antifungal resistanceCandida endophthalmitisCandida meningitisCandida speciesCandida urinary tract infectioncombination therapyCryptococcus speciesdematiaceous fungiflucytosinefungal endocarditis

Identifiers

PMID37051439
PMCPMC10084540
OpenAlexW4362648889

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.