Trial reportOpen forum infectious diseases2026
Development Framework of Desirability of Outcome Ranking Endpoints for Use in Clinical Trials of Invasive Fungal Diseases.
Trial report in Open forum infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Current Mycosis Study Group Education and Research Consortium (MSGERC) and European Confederation of Medical Mycology (ECMM) response criteria for clinical trials often fail to comprehensively assess outcomes of the total patient experience, prompting the need for innovative methodologies. Methods: Utilizing a modified Delphi process, members of MSGERC and ECMM were sent a series of surveys utilizing an online platform. Except for the first survey, participants' responses remained anonymous to the steering committee. The first survey was elaborated based on expert opinion, with each subsequent round building upon the responses from previous rounds. Agreement was predefined by consensus of the steering committee as majority support, set at >70% agreement, for each survey component. Results: For invasive candidiasis, a composite of treatment failure and infectious complications were included to elaborate a DOOR scale, with endpoints measured at 2 weeks after initiation of therapy. For invasive aspergillosis, a composite of treatment failure, presence of disease-attributable complications, and treatment-related adverse events were included to elaborate a DOOR scale, with endpoints measured at 6 weeks after initiation of therapy. For cryptococcosis, a composite of treatment failure and adverse events were included to elaborate a DOOR scale, with endpoints measured at 4 weeks after initiation of therapy. For mucormycosis, treatment failure and adverse events were included to elaborate a DOOR scale, with endpoints measured at 6 and 12 weeks after initiation of therapy. Conclusions: Consensus endpoints were developed for invasive candidiasis, invasive aspergillosis, cryptococcosis, and mucormycosis for use in clinical trials.
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.