ReviewCureus2025
Revisiting the History of Candidiasis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Advancing the Understanding of the Mo-CBPProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Article
- Broad-Spectrum Antimicrobial Potential of the γ-Core Motif Peptides ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy for Superficial, Skin, and Mucosal Fungal Infections: An Update.Microorganisms · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Candida infections in humans are well-documented, but their clinical manifestations have become more evident in recent years. This shift is attributed to advancements in diagnostic modalities and the increasing use of aggressive therapies, where patients are exposed to more invasive procedures, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and immunosuppressive drugs. This shift is attributed to advancements in diagnostic modalities and the increasing use of aggressive therapies, where patients are exposed to more invasive procedures, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and immunosuppressive drugs. This review article outlines various historical milestones regarding multiple aspects of Candida, including its taxonomy, epidemiology, pathogenicity, and therapeutic and diagnostic modalities. A thorough search of the available literature was conducted using scientific search engines such as Google Scholar, PubMed, and ScienceDirect, utilizing appropriate Medical Subject Headings terms. Relevant research articles highlighting important historical milestones related to Candida's taxonomy, pathogenicity, clinical manifestations, diagnostic modalities, and treatment were retrieved and utilized to prepare this manuscript. The historical perspective of Candida is dynamic, and while many aspects have become clear over the years, there are still numerous areas that need further elucidation to fully understand the complex mechanisms of pathogenicity, epidemiology, and antifungal resistance. Additionally, this review aims to provide new insights that will support the development of novel antifungal molecules to expand the current antifungal armamentarium against Candida, which, at present, is limited to three classes: azoles, polyenes, and echinocandins.
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.