Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 286

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Underdiagnosis of Genital Herpes by Current Clinical and Viral-Isolation Procedures

Open access
Koutsky, Laura A., Stevens, Claire E., Holmes, King K., Ashley, Rhoda L., Kiviat, Nancy B., Critchlow, Cathy W., Corey, Lawrence·1992·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The current clinical strategy for diagnosing genital herpes simplex virus (HSV) infection in women relies on clinical findings plus the selective use of viral culture. The effectiveness of this approach for identifying women with genital herpes is unknown. METHODS: We performed physical examinations, colposcopy, Pap smears, viral cultures, and HSV type-specific serologic assays of 779 randomly selected women attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic. RESULTS: Evidence of HSV type 2 infection was detected in 363 women (47 percent), and 9 others (1 percent) had positive cultures indicative of urogenital or anal infection with HSV type 1. Of these 372 women, only 82 (22 percent) had symptoms. Fourteen women (4 percent) had viral shedding without symptoms, 60 (16 percent) had formerly had symptomatic episodes, and 216 (58 percent) had antibodies to HSV-2 with neither viral shedding nor a history of clinical episodes. Characteristic ulcerations of the external genitalia were present in only two thirds of the 66 women with positive HSV cultures; the others had atypical genital lesions or asymptomatic viral shedding. Isolation of HSV from a genitourinary tract specimen was the most sensitive (77 percent) test for confirming a first episode of infection. The detection of HSV-2-specific antibodies was the most sensitive (97 percent) way to confirm symptomatic reactivations of HSV-2 infection. HSV-2 serologic testing also identified the 290 women with asymptomatic HSV-2 infections (37 percent), including 14 (5 percent) who were shedding virus asymptomatically on the day of the examination. CONCLUSIONS: The current strategy for diagnosing genital HSV infection in women misses many cases. Newly developed type-specific serologic methods can identify women with recurrent genital HSV-2 infection, as well as those with unrecognized or subclinical infection.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199206043262305

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 286

Metadata

Authors
Koutsky, L. A., Stevens, C. E., Holmes, K. K., Ashley, R. L., Kiviat, N. B., Critchlow, C. W., & Corey, L.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1992-06-04
Volume
326
Issue
23
Pages
1533-1539
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2312660400
Cited by
286
References
1
FWCI
12.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Underdiagnosis of Genital Herpes by Current Clinical and Viral-Isolation Procedures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199206043262305
The paper
Koutsky, L. A., Stevens, C. E., Holmes, K. K., Ashley, R. L., Kiviat, N. B., Critchlow, C. W., & Corey, L. (1992). Underdiagnosis of Genital Herpes by Current Clinical and Viral-Isolation Procedures. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199206043262305

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.