Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,047

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

New Strains of Bacteria and Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Open access
Sethi, Sanjay, Evans, Nancy, Grant, Brydon J.B., Murphy, Timothy F.·2002·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The role of bacterial pathogens in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is controversial. In older studies, the rates of isolation of bacterial pathogens from sputum were the same during acute exacerbations and during stable disease. However, these studies did not differentiate among strains within a bacterial species and therefore could not detect changes in strains over time. We hypothesized that the acquisition of a new strain of a pathogenic bacterial species is associated with exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study in which clinical information and sputum samples for culture were collected monthly and during exacerbations from 81 outpatients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Molecular typing of sputum isolates of nonencapsulated Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa was performed. RESULTS: Over a period of 56 months, the 81 patients made a total of 1975 clinic visits, 374 of which were made during exacerbations (mean, 2.1 per patient per year). On the basis of molecular typing, an exacerbation was diagnosed at 33.0 percent of the clinic visits that involved isolation of a new strain of a bacterial pathogen, as compared with 15.4 percent of visits at which no new strain was isolated (P<0.001; relative risk of an exacerbation, 2.15; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.83 to 2.53). Isolation of a new strain of H. influenzae, M. catarrhalis, or S. pneumoniae was associated with a significantly increased risk of an exacerbation. CONCLUSIONS: The association between an exacerbation and the isolation of a new strain of a bacterial pathogen supports the causative role of bacteria in exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

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/nejmoa012561

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 1,047

Metadata

Authors
Sethi, S., Evans, N., Grant, B. J. B., & Murphy, T. F.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2002-08-15
Volume
347
Issue
7
Pages
465-471
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2090110893
Cited by
1,047
References
0
FWCI
38.60
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: New Strains of Bacteria and Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa012561
The paper
Sethi, S., Evans, N., Grant, B. J. B., & Murphy, T. F. (2002). New Strains of Bacteria and Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa012561

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.