The WHO fungal priority pathogens list as a game-changer
Open accessThe claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
C. auris has been highlighted as one of four fungal pathogens of critical importance in the recently published WHO fungal pathogens priority list due to the number of large outbreaks and its multi-drug resistant nature.
“As a result, C. auris has been highlighted as one of four fungal pathogens of critical importance in the recently published WHO fungal pathogens priority list in part due to the number of large outbreaks, but also due to the multi-drug resistant nature of the pathogen.74”
From Epidemiology of Invasive Candidiasis (2024) · cites this paper as [74]
The Abstract names C. auris as one of four pathogens deemed critically important and says outbreak potential and antifungal-resistance concern were criteria in the WHO ranking. It does not report a number of large C. auris outbreaks, describe C. auris as multidrug-resistant, or specifically assign those reasons to its critical ranking. The passages have no page numbers in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 9 · Cited by 399
- Authors
- Fisher, M. C., & Denning, D. W.
- Affiliations
- Imperial College London (GB)
- University of Manchester (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Fisher, Matthew C.
- Venue
- Nature Reviews Microbiology
- Published
- 2023-02-06
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 211-212
- ISSN
- 1740-1526 (ISSN-L)
- 1740-1534
- PMC
- PMC9901396
- OpenAlex
- W4319296069
- Cited by
- 399
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 86 · 2025: 134 · 2024: 138 · 2023: 41
- FWCI
- 82.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature Reviews Microbiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust (219551/Z/19/Z)
- Medical Research Council (MR/R015600/1)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Fungal Infections and Studies
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antibiotic Use and Resistance
- Keywords
- invasive fungal infections, antifungal resistance, surveillance (medicine), diagnostics, implementation research, public health interventions
- MeSH terms
- Fungi, World Health Organization
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
