Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8862566›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1996

Candida albicans serotype analysis by flow cytometry.

S Mercure, S Sénéchal, P Auger, G Lemay, S Montplaisir

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Candida dubliniensis: characteristics and identification.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1998
    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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

S MercureDépartement de Microbiologie et Immunologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Québec, Canada.
S Sénéchal
P Auger
G Lemay
S Montplaisir
Université de Montréal · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Candida albicans strains can be assigned to either of two major serogroups, A or B. Antigenic surface determinants present only in serotype A strains allow such a distinction, which has epidemiologic relevance. Reports have established that the relative distributions of the two serotypes can vary depending on the geographic origin of the isolates. A prevalence of susceptibility to an antifungal agent, flucytosine, was also observed with isolates of serotype A. More recently, it was suggested that the occurrence of serotype B isolates in various clinical forms of candidiasis is increasing. However, this latest finding remains controversial since serotyping results vary widely from one laboratory to another because of the lack of standardized methodologies. Difficulty in interpretation of results, which may lead to erroneous serotype identification, is the major setback associated with current methods. For this study, we thus devised a procedure that relies on flow cytometry and that may eliminate ambiguities in serotype determination. The validation of results was achieved with two types of serotype A-specific antisera, Iatron Factor 6 antiserum and an anti-C. albicans antiserum adsorbed on serotype B yeast cells. Agreement between results obtained with these two reagents was 100% with a wide array of Candida strains. These results confirmed the potential of the flow cytometric procedure as a reliable and reproducible method to establish the serotypes of C. albicans strains. Furthermore, some applications of this procedure to the epidemiological study of this human pathogen are presented.

Indexed as

Candida albicansFemaleFlow CytometryHumansSerotyping

Identifiers

PMID8862566
PMCPMC229198
OpenAlexW1662129923

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.