Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Introduction: The treatment of fungal infections in severely ill patients is a clinical and economic challenge worldwide. Liposomal amphotericin B and caspofungin are highly effective antifungal drugs; however, they are very expensive and health systems must select the drug that results in the best clinical outcomes and is economically feasible.
Areas Covered: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Health Economic Evaluation Database, and Centre for Review and Dissemination to find complete economic evaluations that directly compared the two treatment strategies. Expert commentary: Because of the high cost, patients in developing countries experience difficulty accessing highly effective treatments. These data can subsidize a decision for an effective antifungal treatment with reduced costs from all perspectives.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2016.1202766 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!