Home › Research › Risk factors
Systemic Blastomycosis, with Report of a Fatal Case
István A. Gáspár, Walter Fenstermacher, L. R. Lingeman. Radiology, 1932-02-01
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Physical Examination.—Physical examination revealed that the patient was well developed, but poorly nourished, with an appearance of chronic illness.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Gáspár, I. A., Fenstermacher, W., & Lingeman, L. R. (1932). Systemic Blastomycosis, with Report of a Fatal Case. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/18.2.305
Vancouver
Gáspár IA, Fenstermacher W, Lingeman LR. Systemic Blastomycosis, with Report of a Fatal Case. Radiology. 1932. doi:10.1148/18.2.305.
BibTeX
@article{gaspar1932-a51db9a4,
author = {Gáspár, István A. and Fenstermacher, Walter and Lingeman, L. R.},
title = {{Systemic Blastomycosis, with Report of a Fatal Case}},
journal = {Radiology},
year = {1932},
doi = {10.1148/18.2.305},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1148/18.2.305}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Physical Examination.—Physical examination revealed that the patient was well developed, but poorly nourished, with an appearance of chronic illness.
Why it matters
This is a 1932 case report of a fatal case of systemic blastomycosis, describing the patient's appearance of chronic illness. It has no relevance to treating, curing, or preventing Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Study designcase report
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 26/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 25 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 26 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Radiology) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Radiology: journal h-index 431 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | Design recorded as “case report”, which our rubric does not rank (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 1932 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 2 / 7 | Cited 9 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.1 citations a year over 96 year(s) since 1932 |
| Impact for its field and year | 0 / 6 | Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 1 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author L. R. Lingeman holds only 6 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | 0 / 3 | Rochester General Hospital: institution h-index 193 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 25 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 26 out of 100. |
| Total | 26 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it.
Related studies in Risk factors
Also in Risk factors
356 studies in the library are filed under Risk factors with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Risk factors hub.