Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Cost comparison model of empirical versus pre-emptive antifungal therapy in high-risk neutropenic patients.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

PRISMA Flow Diagram of studies included in systematic review and meta-analysis.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Summary of studies comparing empirical versus pre-emptive antifungal therapy in high-risk febrile neutropenic patients.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Comparison of IFD-related outcomes in empiric versus pre-emptive antifungal therapy in high-risk neutropenic patients.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Comparison of antifungal use in empiric versus pre-emptive antifungal therapy in high-risk neutropenic patients.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 3.

Risk of bias in randomized studies as assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration’s “Risk of Bias” tool.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Risk of bias in non-randomized studies as assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Forest plot of pooled relative risk of IFD detection comparing pre-emptive to empirical strategies.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Forest plot of pooled relative risk of IFD-associated mortality comparing pre-emptive to empirical strategies.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Forest plot of pooled relative risk of overall mortality comparing pre-emptive to empirical strategies.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Forest plot of pooled relative risk of antifungal drug use comparing pre-emptive to empirical strategies.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Table 4.

Clinical parameters incorporated into cost comparison model.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Cost parameters incorporated into cost comparison model.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Results of the cost-comparison modela.

More »

Table 6 Expand