↓ Skip to main content

Validation and clinical application of a molecular method for the identification of Cryptococcus neoformans/Cryptococcus gattii complex DNA in human clinical specimens

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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.
Title
Validation and clinical application of a molecular method for the identification of Cryptococcus neoformans/Cryptococcus gattii complex DNA in human clinical specimens
Published in
Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases, September 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.bjid.2015.07.006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vanessa Rivera, Marcela Gaviria, Cesar Muñoz-Cadavid, Luz Cano, Tonny Naranjo

Abstract

The diagnosis of cryptococcosis is usually performed based on cultures of tissue or body fluids and isolation of the fungus, but this method may require several days. Direct microscopic examination, although rapid, is relatively insensitive. Biochemical and immunodiagnostic rapid tests are also used. However, all of these methods have limitations that may hinder final diagnosis. The increasing incidence of fungal infections has focused attention on tools for rapid and accurate diagnosis using molecular biological techniques. Currently, PCR-based methods, particularly nested, multiplex and real-time PCR, provide both high sensitivity and specificity. In the present study, we evaluated a nested PCR targeting the gene encoding the ITS-1 and ITS-2 regions of rDNA in samples from a cohort of patients diagnosed with cryptococcosis. The results showed that in our hands, this Cryptococcus nested PCR assay has 100% specificity and 100% sensitivity and was able to detect until 2 femtograms of Cryptococcus DNA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 24%
Student > Bachelor 8 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 11 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 12 27%
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 24 May 2016.
All research outputs
#23,154,082
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases
#646
of 812 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#246,967
of 287,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases
#13
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 812 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 287,819 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.