↓ Skip to main content

Candida Species

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 16: Candida Species
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
Candida Species
Chapter number 16
Book title
Candida Species
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-3052-4_16
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-3051-7, 978-1-4939-3052-4
Authors

Clancy, Cornelius J, Nguyen, M Hong, Clancy, Cornelius J., Nguyen, M. Hong, Cornelius J. Clancy, M. Hong Nguyen

Abstract

β-D-glucan (Fungitell) and polymerase chain reaction-based (T2Candida) assays of blood samples are FDA-approved adjuncts to cultures for diagnosing candidemia and other types of invasive candidiasis, but their clinical roles are unclear. In this chapter, we describe laboratory protocols for performing Fungitell and T2Candida assays. We then discuss step-by-step methods for interpreting test results at the bedside using a Bayesian framework, and for incorporating assays into rational patient management strategies. Prior to interpreting results, clinicians must recognize that test performance varies based on the type of invasive candidiasis being diagnosed. In general, the type of invasive candidiasis that is most likely in a given patient can be identified, and the pretest likelihood of disease estimated. From there, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) for an assay can be calculated. At a population level, tests can be incorporated into screening strategies for antifungal treatment. NPV and PPV thresholds can be defined for discontinuing antifungal prophylaxis or initiating preemptive treatment, respectively. Using the thresholds, it is possible to assign windows of pretest likelihood for invasive candidiasis (and corresponding patient populations) in which tests are most likely to valuable. At the individual patient level, tests may be useful outside of the windows proposed for screening populations. The interpretive and clinical decision-making processes we discuss will be applicable to other diagnostic assays as they enter the clinic, and to existing assays as more data emerge from various populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 14%
Student > Postgraduate 1 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 29%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,805,172
of 22,873,031 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#7,242
of 13,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,770
of 393,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#752
of 1,471 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,873,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,130 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 393,689 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,471 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.