Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42400319›Full record

ReviewMycoses2026

Pioneer of Medical Mycology: In Memory of Prof. Friedrich Staib, MD, DVM.

Barbara Buchberger, Volker Rickerts

Abstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mycoses, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Barbara BuchbergerMuseum at the Robert Koch Institute, the Public Health Visitor Centre, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8596-740X
Volker RickertsUnit 16, Mycotic and Parasitic Agents and Mycobacteria, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6154-4920

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

At the beginning of Friedrich Staib's academic career in the 1950s, medical mycology was a young discipline in Germany. He studied veterinary and human medicine, earning two doctorates. Initially fascinated by the changes in intestinal flora caused by the newly emerging broad-spectrum antibacterials, i.e., the selection of fungi. In 1953, he began setting up a mycological laboratory at the University of Würzburg and qualified as a professor in microbiology in 1962. In 1968, he became the head of the mycology department, which he established, at the Robert Koch Institute, Germany's public health Institute in Berlin. His work focused on improving the identification of fungi, both within hosts and the environment. His research on Cryptococcus neoformans (Staib agar indicator medium based on the virulence factor melanin for cultivation) gained him international recognition. He was the first to describe secreted proteases from Candida albicans as a virulence mechanism of the main human fungal pathogen. Later, nosocomial exposure of immunocompromised individuals to Aspergillus fumigatus became an issue for him. He cultivated intensive collaboration with clinicians and pathologists, which had a major influence on his research. Staib's broad interest in fungal diagnostics, virulence factors, and environmental niches of fungal pathogens was groundbreaking for medical mycology in Germany and beyond at a time when systemic mycoses were becoming increasingly important. With his systems thinking, he influenced doctoral students and was a role model for public health.

Indexed as

MycologyMycosesAnimalsCryptococcus neoformansFungiGermanyHistory, 20th CenturyHumans20th centuryhistorymycologypathogenic fungusyeast

Identifiers

PMID42400319
PMCPMC13332417

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.