Evidence map›Paper›PMID 7665651›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1995

Three distinct genotypes within Candida parapsilosis from clinical sources.

D Lin, L C Wu, M G Rinaldi, P F Lehmann

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Proposal of Four NewJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  4. Genetic Manipulation as a Tool to UnravelJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Evaluation of matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionisation time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry for identification of Candida parapsilosis, C. orthopsilosis and C. metapsilosis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2012
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

4 authors.

D LinDepartment of Microbiology, Medical College of Ohio, Toledo 43699-0008, USA.
L C Wu
M G Rinaldi
P F Lehmann

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three genetically distinct groups of Candida parapsilosis were detected among clinical isolates. These were distinguishable on the basis of isoenzyme profiles and DNA sequences of internally transcribed spacer (ITS) sequences flanking the 5.8S RNA gene. In an investigation of 45 strains, including 32 clinical isolates from Texas, C. parapsilosis group I composed the majority of the common clinical isolates. The type strain of C. parapsilosis was a member of this group. The 10 group II isolates were indistinguishable from group I strains when tested with the API 20C kit. The two group III isolates differed from those in groups I and II by being D-xylitol positive by the API 20C kit; however, isolates in all groups assimilated D-xylitol from broth. Isoenzyme profiles excluded the close relationship of any of these groups to Lodderomyces elongisporus, which is a teleomorphic yeast that has a physiological profile similar to that of C. parapsilosis. Although there were insignificant differences in the ITS2 rDNA sequences, comparisons of the ITS1 sequences revealed several differences. A sequence analysis of ITS1 in which missing bases were counted as mismatches showed the following similarities: group I versus group II, 87.7%; group I versus group III, 82.1%; group II versus group III, 84.5%. Also, the activity of secreted proteinase showed differences among the three groups, with many group I isolates having moderate to high activity. The degree of susceptibility to antifungal agents, amphotericin B, ketoconazole, and 5-fluorocytosine, could not be used to determine an isolate's group.

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsBase SequenceCandidaDNA, FungalDNA PrimersDNA, RibosomalDrug Resistance, MicrobialGenotypeHumansIsoenzymesMolecular Sequence DataPhenotypeRNA, FungalRNA, Ribosomal, 5.8SAntifungal AgentsDNA, FungalDNA PrimersDNA, RibosomalIsoenzymesRNA, FungalRNA, Ribosomal, 5.8S

Identifiers

PMID7665651
PMCPMC228276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.