Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38337804›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Mycological Methods for Routine Air Sampling and Interpretation of Results in Operating Theaters.

Rok Tomazin, Tadeja Matos

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. 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
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rok TomazinInstitute of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0001-6379-9516
Tadeja MatosInstitute of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
University of Ljubljana · SI

Funding

Slovenian Research Agency P3-0083
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many infectious diseases are transmitted via the air and are, therefore, particularly difficult to combat. These infections include various invasive mycoses caused by molds. The usual route of infection is the inhalation of conidia. In hospitals, infection can also occur through the deposition of conidia in otherwise sterile anatomical sites during surgical and other invasive procedures. Therefore, knowledge of airborne mold concentrations can lead to measures to protect patients from fungal infections. The literature on this topic contains insufficient and sometimes ambiguous information. This is evidenced by the fact that there are no international recommendations or guidelines defining the methodology of air sampling and the interpretation of the results obtained. Surgical departments, intensive care units and medical mycology laboratories are, therefore, left to their own devices, leading to significant differences in the implementation of mycological surveillance in hospitals. The aim of this mini-review is to provide an overview of the current methods of air sampling and interpretation of results used in medical mycology laboratories.

Indexed as

active sampling methodsfilamentous fungihealthcare-associated infectionsmycosessettle plate method

Identifiers

PMID38337804
PMCPMC10855394
OpenAlexW4391323736

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.