The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 34 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Epidemiology of Candidemia in Swiss Tertiary Care Hospitals: Secular Trends, 1991–2000
Open accessAbstract
Candida species are among the most common bloodstream pathogens in the United States, where the emergence of azole-resistant Candida glabrata and Candida krusei are major concerns. Recent comprehensive longitudinal data from Europe are lacking. We conducted a nationwide survey of candidemia during 1991-2000 in 17 university and university-affiliated hospitals representing 79% of all tertiary care hospital beds in Switzerland. The number of transplantations and bloodstream infections increased significantly (P<.001). A total of 1137 episodes of candidemia were observed: Candida species ranked seventh among etiologic agents (2.9% of all bloodstream isolates). The incidence of candidemia was stable over a 10-year period. C. albicans remained the predominant Candida species recovered (66%), followed by C. glabrata (15%). Candida tropicalis emerged (9%), the incidence of Candida parapsilosis decreased (1%), and recovery of C. krusei remained rare (2%). Fluconazole consumption increased significantly (P<.001). Despite increasing high-risk activities, the incidence of candidemia remained unchanged, and no shift to resistant species occurred.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
36 Own result · 22 Not checked yet · 8 Own method · 8 Own interpretation · 5 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These 6 centers reported 774 (68%) of all 1137 episodes of candidemia recorded in the survey over 10 years.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“solid-organ transplantations increased 95% during the same period, from 108 to 211 ( ; )”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“hematopoietic stem cell transplantations increased 124%, from 55 in 1992 to 123 in 2000 ( ; r p 0.83 P ! .005)”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, the species distribution was stable (figure 3).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No significant trend was observed during the 10-year period among university hospitals and universityaffiliated hospitals (figure 1 C ).”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · p. 7 · plain
“In Switzerland, the incidence of candidemia remained essentially unchanged during the 10-year study period.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · p. 7 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the annual incidence of candidemia in university-affiliated hospitals increased significantly, from 0.23 to 0.56 episodes per 10,000 patient-days”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“recovery of C. krusei remained rare (2%)”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The species identification methods remained consistent across hospitals and over the 10-year period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, no trend was observed when university and university-affiliated hospitals were analyzed separately.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“C. albicans remained the predominant Candida species recovered (66%)”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The species identification methods remained consistent across hospitals and over the 10-year period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“C. albicans remained the predominant species, ranging between 64% and 68% of all isolates recovered”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 30
- The quote only partly states this claim. 5
- Probably not a substantial claim. 24
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In these institutions, 533,490 blood cultures were performed over a 10-year period. Of these, 52,565 (9.8%) were positive (i.e., cultures yielded any pathogen).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the overall proportion of nonalbicans species of Candida was 36% in university hospitals and 31% in universityaffiliated hospitals ( ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No significant difference was observed between university and university-affiliated institutions.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the incidence of Candida parapsilosis decreased (1%)”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The species identification methods remained consistent across hospitals and over the 10-year period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A progressive increase in the quantities of the parenteral and oral forms that were administered was observed.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In 2000, most cases of acute leukemia (71%) and transplantations (92%) were reported by university hospitals.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“followed by C. glabrata (15%)”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The species identification methods remained consistent across hospitals and over the 10-year period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“that of Candida parapsilosis decreased from 6% to 1% ( )”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The overall incidence of infection was 0.49 cases per 10,000 patient-days.”
plainn = 117- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“C. glabrata was the second most common species recovered (14% during 1991-1993 and 15% during 2000).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Candida species ranked seventh among etiologic agents (2.9% of all bloodstream isolates).”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · p. 4 · plain
“Candida species accounted for 2.9% of the bloodstream pathogens (median annual proportion, 2.8%; range, 2.3%-3.4%) and ranked seventh”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · p. 4 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The proportion of Candida tropicalis increased from 2% to 9% ( )”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The analysis of hospital characteristics and activities shows a significant increase in the number of blood cultures and transplantations performed”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Resistant nonalbicans isolates of Candida included 5 C. glabrata isolates, 1 C. krusei isolate, 1 Candida norvegiensis isolate, and 1 C. tropicalis isolate.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In 1991, 2.1 and 5.2 g per 10,000 patient-days were administered intravenously and orally, respectively; in 2000, 12.2 and 17.8 g per 10,000 patient-days were administered, respectively”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Candida organisms ranged from the sixth through ninth most recovered bloodstream pathogens and accounted for 2%-3% of all isolates during this period.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Switzerland, one-third of all episodes of candidemia occurred in ICUs, onethird in medical wards (including hemato-oncology units), and one-fourth in surgical wards.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In 1999-2000, data on fluconazole susceptibility were available for 96 (39%) of 245 Candida isolates, comprising 90 (60%) of 151 isolates from university hospitals and 6 (6%) of 94 from university-affiliated hospitals ( ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In 2000, 0.54 episodes per 10,000 patient-days (0.36 episodes per 1000 hospital admissions) and 0.40 episodes per 10,000 patient-days (0.15 episodes per 1000 hospital admissions) were reported in university and university-affiliated hospitals, respectively.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We conducted a nationwide survey of candidemia during 1991-2000 in 17 university and university-affiliated hospitals representing 79% of all tertiary care hospital beds in Switzerland.”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · p. 2 · plain
“A total of 9333 beds representing 79% of all tertiary care hospital beds in Switzerland were included in the survey”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · p. 2 · plain
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These institutions are distributed across the country and play a key role in the national health care system by serving the majority of the population of Switzerland ( ∼ 6,100,000 [84%] of 7,200,000 residents).”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“All laboratories used automated blood culture systems (12 used Bactec [Becton Dickinson] and 5 used BacT/Alert [bioMe ´rieux]), and 7 (44%) of 16 used special blood culture bottles for fungus detection (5 used Bactec Mycosis IC/F vials [Becton Dickinson] and 2 used other types). Recognized standard laboratory techniques for Candida species identification were used by all laboratories [16].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [16] Warren N, Hazen K. Candida, Cryptococcus, and other yeasts of medical importance. In: Murray PR, ed. Manual of clinical microbiology. Washington, DC: ASM Press, 1999:1184-1199.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All Swiss university hospitals (5 health care centers and 2 independent pediatric hospitals) and a representative sample of university-affiliated tertiary care teaching centers ( ) were included in a retrospective surn p 11 vey.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All hematopoietic stem cell and solid-organ transplantations are performed in these centers”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Returned questionnaires (from 17 of the 18 hospitals) were checked by the survey coordinators for completeness and consistency. Those with missing data or inconsistencies were returned for completion and/or correction.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Antifungal susceptibility testing, the quality control of which was based on NCCLS recommendations, was performed in 7 (44%) of 16 laboratories [17].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [17] NCCLS. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts; approved standard. NCCLS document M27-A. Villanova, PA: NCCLS, 1997.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It provides a longitudinal overview of the secular trends associated with patient-care activities, which is representative of the entire country over a 10-year period.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A similar evolution was observed in Asia [18].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] Chen YC, 1997, Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite the lack of a centralized laboratory, this retrospective study represents the largest European series of candidemia and one of the largest worldwide.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The incidence of candidemia remained stable, despite increasing high-risk activities, and no shift to azole-resistant Candida species was observed.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, improved infection-control practices might have contributed to such stabilization, despite an increase of high-risk patient-care activities.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Invasive candidiasis emerged as a major problem in US hospitals in the 1980s [5, 7].”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“However, an inverse trend was observed during 19891999 among ICUs in US hospitals reporting to the NNIS system [8].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The emergence of Candida species with decreased susceptibility or intrinsic resistance to azoles was a major concern in the 1990s.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Other North American and European investigators confirmed these observations in larger hospital settings [10, 11, 13, 20, 22, 25, 26].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [10] Abi-Said D, 1997, Clin Infect Dis source
- Not checked yetcites [11] Viscoli C, 1999, Clin Infect Dis source
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
- Not checked yetcites [20] Berrouane YF, 1999, J Clin Microbiol source
- Not checked yetcites [22] source
- Not checked yetcites [25] source
- Not checked yetcites [26] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This phenomenon was first reported in the United States in neutropenic recipients of bone marrow transplants [9].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] Wingard JR, 1991, N Engl J Med source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Other recent multicenter longitudinal data from Europe are lacking.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Ten years later, Berrouane et al. [20] observed 0.98 episodes of candidemia per 10,000 patient-days in 1 US tertiary care center.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Berrouane YF, 1999, J Clin Microbiol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“No significant change was reported in 1 Swiss hospital between 1989 and 2000 [19].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In Europe, contrasting data were reported in the early 1990s-the incidence of candidemia increased in The Netherlands and remained stable in Norway [13, 15].”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The distribution of Candida species plays a key role for establishing efficient management strategies [23, 24].”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In contrast, a study from 1 Swiss university hospital reported no shift to nonalbicans species of Candida, despite a significant increase in fluconazole use between 1989 and 2000 [19].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The role of the widespread use of azoles in the shift to resistant Candida species has been largely debated and remains controversial [12].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] White MH, 1997, Clin Infect Dis source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The species distributions were very close to those reported in Norway during the early 1990s, in Italy during an ECCM survey conducted in the late 1990s, and in Wales [15, 22, 28].”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two groups observed an important increase of C. glabrata fungemia in the 1990s and analyzed fluconazole consumption over time.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Trick et al. [8] recently confirmed these trends in patients in US ICUs.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Voss et al. [13] evaluated the annual nationwide fluconazole use in The Netherlands in kilograms and observed a 4-fold increase between 1990 and 1995.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Similarly, Berrouane et al. [20] observed a substantial increase in fluconazole use, from 3 to 33 g per 10,000 patient-days in 1990 and 1994, respectively.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Berrouane YF, 1999, J Clin Microbiol source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In institutions where this shift occurred, proportions of C. glabrata and C. krusei were 15%-45% and 5%20%, respectively.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
No recent longitudinal multicenter study on candidemia in Europe had been performed before this survey.
“to our knowledge, no recent longitudinal multicenter study has been performed in Europe.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The participating hospitals' candidemia surveillance data are complete and accurate for the study period.
“Data on the number of patient-days spent in the hospital, the transplantation activities, the number of blood cultures performed, the 10 most frequently recovered bloodstream isolates, and the consumption of fluconazole during 1991-2000 were additionally obtained from a representative sample of university and university-affiliated hospitals.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Blood culture practices and the number of blood cultures performed are valid indicators of the incidence of bloodstream infections.
“The number of transplantations and bloodstream infections increased significantly ( ).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Fluconazole consumption data from the representative sample reflect national fluconazole consumption in Swiss tertiary care hospitals.
“Fluconazole consumption increased significantly ( ).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The species identification methods remained consistent across hospitals and over the 10-year period.
“Recognized standard laboratory techniques for Candida species identification were used by all laboratories [16].”
The paper relies on this without support.
Critically ill and severely immunocompromised patients are at particularly high risk for invasive candidiasis.
“Critically ill and severely immunocompromised patients are at particularly high risk for invasive candidiasis.”
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?
In the citing paper
“Overall, ICU candidiasis represent one-third of all invasive candidiasis and is associated with a high mortality rate [11].”
From Management of invasive candidiasis and candidemia in adult non-neutropenic intensive care unit patients: part I. Epidemiology and diagnosis (2009) · cites this paper as [11]
In the citing paper
“The isolates shared a common DNA fingerprint, and nosocomial transmission stopped following reinforcement of infection control measures.”
From Epidemiology of Invasive Candidiasis: a Persistent Public Health Problem (2007) · cites this paper as [151]
In the citing paper
“Masala et al. (151) reported a cluster of C. guilliermondii catheter-related BSIs among five surgical patients.”
From Epidemiology of Invasive Candidiasis: a Persistent Public Health Problem (2007) · cites this paper as [151]
In the citing paper
“The infections were successfully treated with catheter removal and administration of fluconazole.”
From Epidemiology of Invasive Candidiasis: a Persistent Public Health Problem (2007) · cites this paper as [151]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
§ DISCUSSION · p. 6
“Although fluconazole use increased significantly over the 10-year period, no shift toward azole-resistant nonalbicans species of Candida and no resistance in C. albicans were observed.”
§ RESULTS · p. 5
“Fifty-six C. albicans isolates and 40 nonP ! .001 albicans isolates of Candida were tested for susceptibility to fluconazole, and 1 (2%) and 8 (20%) of the isolates, respectively, were resistant, according to the NCCLS criteria.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“Data on the hospital ward distribution of 92 (77%) of all 117 patients with candidemia reported in 2000 were available from 10 hospitals.”
Reported 77 · recomputed 78.632479
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“109 (32%) of 355 and 107 (35%) of”
Reported 32 · recomputed 30.704225
Citations
Cites
Manual of Clinical Microbiology.
(1980) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-93-6-939_2 · Cited by 14,435
Nosocomial Bloodstream Infections in United States Hospitals: A Three‐Year Analysis
Edmond, M. B., Wallace, S. E., McClish, D. K., Pfaller, M. A., Jones, R. N., & Wenzel, R. P. (1999) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/520192 · Cited by 1,387
Secular Trends in the Epidemiology of Nosocomial Fungal Infections in the United States, 1980-1990
Beck‐Sagué, C. M., Jarvis, W. R., & System, N. N. I. S. (1993) · The Journal of Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/infdis/167.5.1247 · Cited by 1,140
Wingard, J. R., Merz, W. G., Rinaldi, M. G., Johnson, T. R., Karp, J. E., & Saral, R. (1991) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199110313251803 · Cited by 937
Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Candidiasis
Rex, J. H., Walsh, T. J., Sobel, J. D., Filler, S. G., Pappas, P. G., Dismukes, W. E., & Edwards, J. E. (2000) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/313749 · Cited by 927
Secular trends in nosocomial primary bloodstream infections in the United States, 1980–1989.
Banerjee, S. N., Emori, T. G., Culver, D. H., Gaynes, R. P., Jarvis, W. R., Horan, T., Edwards, J. R., Tolson, J., Henderson, T., Martone, W. J., et al. (1991) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/0002-9343(91)90349-3 · Cited by 880
Hospital-Acquired Candidemia: The Attributable Mortality and Excess Length of Stay
Wey, S. B. (1988) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.1988.00380120094019 · Cited by 831
The Epidemiology of Hematogenous Candidiasis Caused by Different Candida Species
Abi‐Said, D., Anaissie, E., Uzun, O., Raad, I., Pinzcowski, H., & Vartivarian, S. (1997) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/513663 · Cited by 755
Trick, W. E., Fridkin, S. K., Edwards, J. R., Hajjeh, R. A., Gaynes, R. P., & Hospitals, T. N. N. I. S. S. (2002) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/342300 · Cited by 660
Viscoli, C., Girmenia, C., Marinus, A., Collette, L., Martino, P., Vandercam, B., Doyen, C., Lebeau, B., Spence, D., Krcmery, V., et al. (1999) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/514731 · Cited by 601
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Beck-Sague CM, 1993, The National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance System. J Infect Dis, 167, 1247
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Epidemiology of Invasive Candidiasis: a Persistent Public Health Problem
Pfaller, M. A., & Diekema, D. J. (2007) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00029-06 · Cited by 4,174
Pappas, P. G., Kauffman, C. A., Andes, D., Benjamin, D. K., Calandra, T. F., Edwards, J. E., Filler, S. G., Fisher, J. F., Kullberg, B.-J., Zeichner, L. O., et al. (2009) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/596757 · Cited by 3,191
Self-citationHorn, D. L., Neofytos, D., Anaissie, E. J., Fishman, J. A., Steinbach, W. J., Olyaei, A. J., Marr, K. A., Pfaller, M. A., Chang, C., & Webster, K. M. (2009) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/599039 · Cited by 956
Epidemiology of Candida species infections in critically ill non-immunosuppressed patients
Eggimann, P., Garbino, J., & Pittet, D. (2003) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(03)00801-6 · Cited by 900
Self-citationKampf, G., & Krämer, A. (2004) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.17.4.863-893.2004 · Cited by 760
Epidemiology and risk factors for invasive candidiasis
Yapar, N. (2014) · Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management · doi:10.2147/tcrm.s40160 · Cited by 610
Almirante, B., Rodríguez-Pardo, D., Park, B. J., Cuenca‐Estrella, M., Planes, A. M., Almela, M., Mensa, J., Sánchez, F., Ayats, J., Giménez, M., et al. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.43.4.1829-1835.2005 · Cited by 571
Leroy, O., Gangneux, J., Montravers, P., Mira, J. P., Gouin, F., Sollet, J.-P., Carlet, J. M., Reynes, J., Rosenheim, M., Regnier, B., et al. (2009) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e31819efac0 · Cited by 551
Colombo, A. L., Nucci, M., Park, B. J., Nouér, S. A., Arthington, B. A., da Matta, D. A., Warnock, D. W., & Morgan, J. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.00773-06 · Cited by 525
Invasive candidiasis as a cause of sepsis in the critically ill patient
Delaloye, J., & Calandra, T. (2013) · Virulence · doi:10.4161/viru.26187 · Cited by 395
Self-citationEpidemiology of invasive candidiasis
Arendrup, M. C. (2010) · Current Opinion in Critical Care · doi:10.1097/mcc.0b013e32833e84d2 · Cited by 376
Epidemiology of candidemia in Latin America: a laboratory-based survey
Nucci, M., Queiroz-Telles, F., Alvarado-Matute, T., Tiraboschi, I. N., Cortes, J., Zurita, J., Guzman-Blanco, M., Santolaya, M. E., Thompson, L., Sifuentes-Osornio, J., et al. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059373 · Cited by 374
The changing face of epidemiology of invasive fungal disease in Europe
Lass‐Flörl, C. (2009) · Mycoses · doi:10.1111/j.1439-0507.2009.01691.x · Cited by 371
Lortholary, O., Desnos-Ollivier, M., Sitbon, K., Fontanet, A., Bretagne, S., & Dromer, F. (2011) · Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · doi:10.1128/aac.01128-10 · Cited by 362
Candidaemia in Europe: epidemiology and resistance
Tortorano, A. M., Kibbler, C. C., Pemán, J., Bernhardt, H., Klingspor, L., & Grillot, R. (2006) · International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents · doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2006.01.002 · Cited by 349
Falagas, M. E., Ρούσσος, Ν., & Vardakas, K. Z. (2010) · International Journal of Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2010.04.006 · Cited by 346
Tumbarello, M., Posteraro, B., Trecarichi, E. M., Fiori, B., Rossi, M., Porta, R., de Gaetano Donati, K., La Sorda, M., Spanu, T., Fadda, G., et al. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.00131-07 · Cited by 343
Nosocomial Fungal Infections: Epidemiology, Infection Control, and Prevention
Alangaden, G. J. (2011) · Infectious Disease Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.idc.2010.11.003 · Cited by 337
Morbidity and mortality of candidaemia in Europe: an epidemiologic meta-analysis
Koehler, P., Stecher, M., Cornely, O. A., Koehler, D., Vehreschild, M. J. G. T., Bohlius, J., Wisplinghoff, H., & Vehreschild, J. J. (2019) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2019.04.024 · Cited by 336
Epidemiological trends in nosocomial candidemia in intensive care
Bassetti, M., Righi, E., Costa, A., Fasce, R., Molinari, M. P., Rosso, R., Pallavicini, F. B., & Viscoli, C. (2006) · BMC Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1186/1471-2334-6-21 · Cited by 332
Hochreiter, M., Köhler, T., Schweiger, A. M., Keck, F. S., Bein, B., von Spiegel, T., & Schroeder, S. (2009) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc7903 · Cited by 315
The French Mycosis Study Group, Lortholary, O., Renaudat, C., Sitbon, K., Madec, Y., Denoeud‐Ndam, L., Wolff, M., Fontanet, A. L., Bretagne, S., & Dromer, F. (2014) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-014-3408-3 · Cited by 310
Puig‐Asensio, M., Padilla, B., Garnacho‐Montero, J., Zaragoza, Ó., Aguado, J. M., Zaragoza, R., Montejo, M., Muñóz, P., Ruíz-Camps, I., Cuenca‐Estrella, M., et al. (2013) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1111/1469-0691.12380 · Cited by 297
A multicenter study of septic shock due to candidemia: Outcomes and predictors of mortality.
Bassetti, M., Righi, E., Ansaldi, F., Merelli, M., Cecilia, T., De Pascale, G., Diaz-Martin, A., Luzzati, R., Rosin, C., Lagunes, L., et al. (2014) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-014-3310-z · Cited by 284
Epidemiology of opportunistic fungal infections in Latin America
Nucci, M., Queiroz‐Telles, F., Tobón, A. M., Restrepo, A., & Colombo, A. L. (2010) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/655683 · Cited by 280
Candidemia and invasive candidiasis in adults: A narrative review
Antinori, S., Milazzo, L., Sollima, S., Galli, M., & Corbellino, M. (2016) · European Journal of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ejim.2016.06.029 · Cited by 259
Patients at High Risk of Invasive Fungal Infections
Rüping, M. J. G. T., Vehreschild, J. J., & Cornely, O. A. (2008) · Drugs · doi:10.2165/00003495-200868140-00002 · Cited by 250
Invasive candidiasis in the intensive care unit
Ostrosky-Zeichner, L., & Pappas, P. G. (2006) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000201897.78123.44 · Cited by 247
Almirante, B., Rodríguez-Pardo, D., Cuenca‐Estrella, M., Almela, M., Sánchez, F., Ayats, J., Alonso-Tarrés, C., Rodrı́guez-Tudela, J. L., Pahissa, A., & the Barcelona Candidemia Project Study Group (2006) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.44.5.1681-1685.2006 · Cited by 246
Schroeder, S., Hochreiter, M., Koehler, T., Schweiger, A.-M., Bein, B., Keck, F. S., & von Spiegel, T. (2009) · Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00423-008-0432-1 · Cited by 238
Bassetti, M., Merelli, M., Righi, E., Diaz-Martin, A., Rosello, E. M., Luzzati, R., Parra, A., Trecarichi, E. M., Sanguinetti, M., Posteraro, B., et al. (2013) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.01998-13 · Cited by 228
Schmiedel, Y., & Zimmerli, S. (2016) · Swiss Medical Weekly · doi:10.4414/smw.2016.14281 · Cited by 232
Pappas, P. G. (2006) · Infectious Disease Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.idc.2006.07.004 · Cited by 233
Trends in the Epidemiology of Invasive Fungal Infections
Warnock, D. W. (2007) · Nippon Ishinkin Gakkai Zasshi · doi:10.3314/jjmm.48.1 · Cited by 222
Bench-to-bedside review: Candida infections in the intensive care unit
Méan, M., Marchetti, O., & Calandra, T. (2008) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc6212 · Cited by 217
Self-citationBassetti, M., Taramasso, L., Nicco, E., Molinari, M. P., Mussap, M., & Viscoli, C. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0024198 · Cited by 215
β-Glucan Antigenemia Anticipates Diagnosis of Blood Culture–Negative Intraabdominal Candidiasis
Tissot, F., Lamoth, F., Hauser, P. M., Orasch, C., Flückiger, U. M., Siegemund, M., Zimmerli, S., Calandra, T., Billé, J., Eggimann, P., et al. (2013) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.201211-2069oc · Cited by 204
Self-citationInvasive candidiasis: current clinical challenges and unmet needs in adult populations
Soriano, À., Honoré, P. M., Puerta‐Alcalde, P., García‐Vidal, C., Pagotto, A., Gonçalves, D. C., & Verweij, P. E. (2023) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dkad139 · Cited by 215
Antimicrobial therapy for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock: An evidence-based review
Bochud, P., Bonten, M. J. M., Marchetti, O., & Calandra, T. (2004) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000143118.41100.14 · Cited by 197
Self-citationInitial antimicrobial management of sepsis
Niederman, M. S., Baron, R. M., Bouadma, L., Calandra, T., Daneman, N., Waele, J. J. D., Kollef, M. H., Lipman, J., & NAIR, G. B. (2021) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/s13054-021-03736-w · Cited by 199
Self-citationFluconazole for the management of invasive candidiasis: where do we stand after 15 years?
Charlier, C., Hart, E. J., Lefort, A., Ribaud, P., Dromer, F., Denning, D. W., & Lortholary, O. (2006) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dki473 · Cited by 187
Posteraro, B., PASCALE, G. D., Tumbarello, M., Torelli, R., Pennisi, M. A., Bello, G., Maviglia, R., Fadda, G., Sanguinetti, M., & Antonelli, M. M. (2011) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc10507 · Cited by 190
Arendrup, M. C., Fuursted, K., Gahrn-Hansen, B., Jensen, I. M., Knudsen, J. D., Lundgren, B., Schønheyder, H. C., & Tvede, M. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.43.9.4434-4440.2005 · Cited by 177
One year prospective survey of Candida bloodstream infections in Scotland
Odds, F. C., Hanson, M. F., Davidson, A. D., Jacobsen, M. D., Wright, P., Whyte, J. A., Gow, N. A. R., & Jones, B. L. (2007) · Journal of Medical Microbiology · doi:10.1099/jmm.0.47239-0 · Cited by 176
Active Surveillance of Candidemia, Australia
Chen, S., Slavin, M. A., Nguyen, Q. A., Marriott, D. J. E., Playford, E. G., Ellis, D., Sorrell, T. C., & Study, T. A. C. (2006) · Emerging infectious diseases · doi:10.3201/eid1210.060389 · Cited by 174
Guery, B. P., Arendrup, M. C., Auzinger, G., Azoulay, É., Borges Sá, M., Johnson, E. M., Müller, E., Putensen, C., Rotstein, C., Sganga, G., et al. (2009) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-008-1338-7 · Cited by 173
The Changing Face of Fungal Infections in Health Care Settings
Weinstein, R. A., & Fridkin, S. K. (2005) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/497138 · Cited by 170
Colombo, A. L., Guimarães, T., Silva, L. R. B. F., de Almeida, L. P., Cunha, A. K. B., Rady, P., Alves, T., & Rosas, R. C. (2007) · Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology · doi:10.1086/513615 · Cited by 161
Mailles, A., Blanckaert, K., Chaud, P., van der Werf, S., Lina, B., Caro, V., Campese, C., Guery, B. P., Prouvost, H., Lemaire, X., et al. (2013) · Eurosurveillance · doi:10.2807/ese.18.24.20502-en · Cited by 152
Predictors and Outcomes of Candiduria in Renal Transplant Recipients
Safdar, N., Slattery, W. R., Knasinski, V., Gangnon, R. E., Li, Z., Pirsch, J. D., & Andes, D. R. (2005) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/429620 · Cited by 151
Spieß, B., Seifarth, W., Hummel, M., Frank, O., Fabarius, A. C., Zheng, C., Mörz, H., Hehlmann, R., & Buchheidt, D. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.00942-07 · Cited by 149
Genome-Wide Transcription Profiling of the Early Phase of Biofilm Formation by Candida albicans
Murillo, L. A., Newport, G., Lan, C., Habelitz, S., Dungan, J. M., & Agabian, N. M. (2005) · Eukaryotic Cell · doi:10.1128/ec.4.9.1562-1573.2005 · Cited by 149
Ortega, M., Marco, F., Soriano, À., Almela, M., Martínez, J. A., López, J. D. S., Pitart, C., & Mensa, J. (2011) · Journal of Hospital Infection · doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2010.09.026 · Cited by 148
Tortorano, A. M., Dho, G., Prigitano, A., Breda, G., Grancini, A., Emmi, V., Cavanna, C., Marino, G., Morero, S., Ossi, C. M., et al. (2011) · Mycoses · doi:10.1111/j.1439-0507.2011.02044.x · Cited by 142
Eggimann, P., & Pittet, D. (2014) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-014-3355-z · Cited by 143
Self-citationEpidemiology of fungal infections in China
Chen, M., Xu, Y., Hong, N., Yang, Y., Lei, W., Du, L., Zhao, J., Lei, X., Xiong, L., Cai, L., et al. (2018) · Frontiers of Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11684-017-0601-0 · Cited by 137
Ruhnke, M., Rickerts, V., Cornely, O. A., Buchheidt, D., Glöckner, A., Heinz, W., Höhl, R., Horré, R., Karthaus, M., Kujath, P., et al. (2011) · Mycoses · doi:10.1111/j.1439-0507.2011.02040.x · Cited by 140
Systemic antifungal therapy in critically ill patients without invasive fungal infection*
Azoulay, É., Dupont, H., Tabah, A., Lortholary, O., Stahl, J. ‐., Français, A., Martin, C., Guidet, B., & Timsit, J. (2012) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e318236f297 · Cited by 136
A review of Candida species causing blood stream infection
Giri, S., & Kindo, A. J. (2012) · Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology · doi:10.4103/0255-0857.99484 · Cited by 132
Cuenca‐Estrella, M., Rodríguez-Pardo, D., Almirante, B., Morgan, J., Planes, A. M., Almela, M., Mensa, J., Sánchez, F., Ayats, J., Giménez, M., et al. (2004) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dkh548 · Cited by 132
Diagnosis of invasive candidiasis in the ICU
Eggimann, P., Billé, J., & Marchetti, O. (2011) · Annals of Intensive Care · doi:10.1186/2110-5820-1-37 · Cited by 138
Self-citationThe risk and clinical outcome of candidemia depending on underlying malignancy
The French Mycoses Study Group, Lortholary, O., Renaudat, C., Sitbon, K., Desnos‐Ollivier, M., Bretagne, S., & Dromer, F. (2017) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-017-4743-y · Cited by 131
Invasive Candida species infections: a 5 year population-based assessment
Laupland, K. B., Gregson, D. B., Church, D. L., Ross, T., & Elsayed, S. (2005) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dki258 · Cited by 130
Photodynamic inactivation for controlling Candida albicans infections
Gonzales, F. P., & Maisch, T. (2011) · Fungal Biology · doi:10.1016/j.funbio.2011.10.001 · Cited by 129
Global trends in candidemia: Review of reports from 1995–2005
Morgan, J. (2005) · Current Infectious Disease Reports · doi:10.1007/s11908-005-0044-7 · Cited by 129
Diagnosis and management of invasive candidiasis in the ICU: an updated approach to an old enemy
Calandra, T., Roberts, J. A., Antonelli, M. M., Bassetti, M., & Vincent, J. (2016) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/s13054-016-1313-6 · Cited by 128
Self-citationOrasch, C., Marchetti, O., Garbino, J., Schrenzel, J., Zimmerli, S., Mühlethaler, K., Pfyffer, G. E., Ruef, C., Fehr, J. S., Zbinden, R., et al. (2013) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1111/1469-0691.12440 · Cited by 122
Self-citationCruciani, M., de Lalla, F., & Mengoli, C. (2005) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-005-2794-y · Cited by 122
Bassetti, M., Trecarichi, E. M., Righi, E., Sanguinetti, M., Bisio, F., Posteraro, B., Soro, O., Cauda, R., Viscoli, C., & Tumbarello, M. (2007) · Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease · doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2007.01.005 · Cited by 122
A 1-year prospective survey of candidemia in Italy and changing epidemiology over one decade
Tortorano, A. M., Prigitano, A., Lazzarini, C., Passera, M., Deiana, M. L., Cavinato, S., De Luca, C., Grancini, A., Lo Cascio, G., Ossi, C., et al. (2013) · Infection · doi:10.1007/s15010-013-0455-6 · Cited by 110
Zepelin, M. B., Kunz, L., Rüchel, R., Reichard, U., Weig, M., & Groß, U. (2007) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dkm145 · Cited by 109
Xiao, Z., Wang, Q., Zhu, F., & An, Y. (2019) · Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control · doi:10.1186/s13756-019-0534-2 · Cited by 111
Oberoi, J. K., Wattal, C., Goel, N., Raveendran, R., Datta, S., & Prasad, K. (2012) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 106
León, C., Ostrosky-Zeichner, L. L., & Schuster, M. G. (2014) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-014-3281-0 · Cited by 109
Epidemiology of invasive fungal infection
Castón, J. J., Rivero, A., & Torre‐Cisneros, J. (2008) · International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents · doi:10.1016/s0924-8579(08)70009-8 · Cited by 105
Clinical and Therapeutic Aspects of Candidemia: A Five Year Single Centre Study
Bassetti, M., Merelli, M., Ansaldi, F., de Florentiis, D., Sartor, A., Scarparo, C., Callegari, A., & Righi, E. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0127534 · Cited by 109
Angulo, F. J., & Scallan, E. (2007) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/511648 · Cited by 106
What has changed in the treatment of invasive candidiasis? A look at the past 10 years and ahead
Bassetti, M., Righi, E., Montravers, P., & Cornely, O. A. (2017) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dkx445 · Cited by 102
Chen, S. C. A., Marriott, D. J. E., Playford, E. G., Nguyen, Q. A., Ellis, D., Meyer, W., Sorrell, T. C., & Slavin, M. A. (2009) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2009.02821.x · Cited by 99
UncommonCandidaSpecies Fungemia among Cancer Patients, Houston, Texas, USA
Jung, D. S., Farmakiotis, D., Jiang, Y., Tarrand, J. J., & Kontoyiannis, D. P. (2015) · Emerging infectious diseases · doi:10.3201/eid2111.150404 · Cited by 96
Twenty-two years of candidaemia surveillance: results from a Norwegian national study
Hesstvedt, L., Gaustad, P., Andersen, C. T., Haarr, E., Hannula, R., Haukland, H. H., Hermansen, N. O., Larssen, K. W., Mylvaganam, H., Ranheim, T. E., et al. (2015) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2015.06.008 · Cited by 94
Risk factors for candidaemia in critically ill patients: a prospective surveillance study*
Marcos, R. J., Álvarez-Lerma, F., Jurado, M., Palomar, M., Nolla‐Salas, J., de Leon, M. A. M., León, C., & the EPCAN Study Group (2007) · Mycoses · doi:10.1111/j.1439-0507.2007.01366.x · Cited by 94
Incidence of candidaemia and relationship with fluconazole use in an intensive care unit
Bassetti, M., Ansaldi, F., Nicolini, L. A., Malfatto, E. N., Molinari, M. P., Mussap, M., Rebesco, B., Pallavicini, F. B., Icardi, G., & Viscoli, C. (2009) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dkp251 · Cited by 95
Golan, Y., Wolf, M. P., Pauker, S. G., Wong, J. B., & Hadley, S. (2005) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-143-12-200512200-00004 · Cited by 94
Leroy, G., Lambiotte, F., Thévenin, D., Lemaire, C., Parmentier, E., Devos, P., & Leroy, O. (2011) · Annals of Intensive Care · doi:10.1186/2110-5820-1-50 · Cited by 92
Secular trend in candidemia and the use of fluconazole in Finland, 2004-2007
Poikonen, E., Lyytikäinen, O., Anttila, V.-J., Koivula, I., Lumio, J., Kotilainen, P., Syrjälä, H., & Ruutu, P. (2010) · BMC Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1186/1471-2334-10-312 · Cited by 92
Treatment options of invasive fungal infections in adults
Marchetti, O., Eggimann, P., Pittet, D., Glauser, M., & Calandra, T. (2006) · Swiss Medical Weekly · doi:10.4414/smw.2006.11392 · Cited by 90
Self-citationCandidemia in a Brazilian hospital: the importance of Candida parapsilosis
Medrano, D. J. A., Brilhante, R. S. N., Cordeiro, R. D. A., Rocha, M. F. G., Rabenhorst, S. H. B., & Sidrim, J. J. C. (2006) · Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de São Paulo · doi:10.1590/s0036-46652006000100004 · Cited by 89
Gómez-Gaviria, M., & Mora-Montes, H. M. (2020) · Infection and Drug Resistance · doi:10.2147/idr.s247944 · Cited by 93
Seyoum, E., Bitew, A., & Mihret, A. (2020) · BMC Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1186/s12879-020-4883-5 · Cited by 87
Bhattacharjee, P. (2016) · Current Medical Mycology · doi:10.18869/acadpub.cmm.2.2.5 · Cited by 93
Antifungal stewardship in invasive Candida infections
Ruhnke, M. (2014) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1111/1469-0691.12622 · Cited by 90
Invasive Candidiasis: An Overview from Taiwan
Ruan, S., & Hsueh, P. (2009) · Journal of the Formosan Medical Association · doi:10.1016/s0929-6646(09)60091-7 · Cited by 85
The effect of biomaterials and antifungals on biofilm formation by Candida species: a review
Cuéllar‐Cruz, M., Vega‐González, A., Mendoza‐Novelo, B., López-Romero, E., Ruiz‐Baca, E., Escorza, M. A. Q., & Villagómez-Castro, J. C. (2012) · European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1007/s10096-012-1634-6 · Cited by 83
Risk Factors for Fluconazole-Resistant Candida glabrata Bloodstream Infections
Lee, I., Fishman, N. O., Zaoutis, T. E., Morales, K. H., Weiner, M. G., Synnestvedt, M. B., Nachamkin, I., & Lautenbach, E. (2009) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.169.4.379 · Cited by 82
da Matta, D. A., de Almeida, L. P., Machado, A. M. D. O., Azevedo, A. C., Kusano, E. J. U., Travassos, N. F., Salomão, R., & Colombo, A. L. (2007) · Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease · doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2006.10.011 · Cited by 83
Benedict, K., Roy, M., Kabbani, S., Anderson, E. J., Farley, M. M., Harb, S., Harrison, L. H., Bonner, L., Wadu, V. L., Marceaux, K., et al. (2018) · Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · doi:10.1093/jpids/piy009 · Cited by 81
Candidaemia in internal medicine departments: the burden of a rising problem
Bassetti, M., Molinari, M. P., Mussap, M., Viscoli, C., & Righi, E. (2013) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1111/1469-0691.12155 · Cited by 81
Candida Species: New Insights into Biofilm Formation
Cuéllar-Cruz, M., López-Romero, E., Villagómez-Castro, J. C., & Ruiz-Baca, E. (2012) · Future Microbiology · doi:10.2217/fmb.12.48 · Cited by 80
Pfaller, M. A., Diekema, D. J., Gibbs, D. L., Newell, V. A., Barton, R., Bijie, H., Bille, J., Chang, S.-C., da Luz Martins, M., Duse, A., et al. (2010) · Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease · doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2010.01.002 · Cited by 80
Metadata
- Authors
- Marchetti, O., Bille, J., Fluckiger, U., Eggimann, P., Ruef, C., Garbino, J., Calandra, T., Glauser, M., Tauber, M. G., Pittet, D., & Fungal Infection Network of Switzerland (FUNGINOS)
- Affiliations
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CH)
- University Hospital of Geneva (CH)
- University of Zurich (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Marchetti, Oscar
- Venue
- Clinical Infectious Diseases
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-02
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 311-320
- ISSN
- 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-6591
- OpenAlex
- W2156803121
- Semantic Scholar
- 0d5bcae50ab2bf491c4b0a502cd9e553f5257a3a
- Cited by
- 478
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 20.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Clinical Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- reroDoc Digital Library (submittedVersion)
- IRIS (submittedVersion)
- BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion)
- Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
- Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
- Funders
- Pfizer
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Yeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Fungal Infections and Studies
- Keywords
- candidemia, Candida species, bloodstream infection, Candida albicans, Candida glabrata, Candida tropicalis, Candida parapsilosis, Candida krusei, azole resistance, transplant recipients, incidence trends, Switzerland
- MeSH terms
- Antifungal Agents, Candidiasis, Cross Infection, Data Collection, Drug Resistance, Microbial, Hospitals, University, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Switzerland, United States, Fluconazole, Fungemia
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-05 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
