Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 468

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microscopic-Observation Drug-Susceptibility Assay for the Diagnosis of TB

Open access
Moore, David A.J., Evans, Carlton A.W., Gilman, Robert H., Caviedes, Luz, Coronel, Jorge, Vivar, Aldo, Sanchez, Eduardo, Piñedo, Yvette, Saravia, Juan Carlos, Salazar, Cayo, Oberhelman, Richard, Hollm-Delgado, Maria-Graciela, LaChira, Doris, Escombe, A. Roderick, Friedland, Jon S.·2006·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: New diagnostic tools are urgently needed to interrupt the transmission of tuberculosis and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Rapid, sensitive detection of tuberculosis and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in sputum has been demonstrated in proof-of-principle studies of the microscopic-observation drug-susceptibility (MODS) assay, in which broth cultures are examined microscopically to detect characteristic growth. METHODS: In an operational setting in Peru, we investigated the performance of the MODS assay for culture and drug-susceptibility testing in three target groups: unselected patients with suspected tuberculosis, prescreened patients at high risk for tuberculosis or multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, and unselected hospitalized patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus. We compared the MODS assay head-to-head with two reference methods: automated mycobacterial culture and culture on Löwenstein-Jensen medium with the proportion method. RESULTS: Of 3760 sputum samples, 401 (10.7%) yielded cultures positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Sensitivity of detection was 97.8% for MODS culture, 89.0% for automated mycobacterial culture, and 84.0% for Löwenstein-Jensen culture (P<0.001); the median time to culture positivity was 7 days, 13 days, and 26 days, respectively (P<0.001), and the median time to the results of susceptibility tests was 7 days, 22 days, and 68 days, respectively. The incremental benefit of a second MODS culture was minimal, particularly in patients at high risk for tuberculosis or multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Agreement between MODS and the reference standard for susceptibility was 100% for rifampin, 97% for isoniazid, 99% for rifampin and isoniazid (combined results for multidrug resistance), 95% for ethambutol, and 92% for streptomycin (kappa values, 1.0, 0.89, 0.93, 0.71, and 0.72, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A single MODS culture of a sputum sample offers more rapid and sensitive detection of tuberculosis and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis than the existing gold-standard methods used.

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/nejmoa055524

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 468

Metadata

Authors
Moore, D. A. J., Evans, C. A. W., Gilman, R. H., Caviedes, L., Coronel, J., Vivar, A., Sanchez, E., Piñedo, Y., Saravia, J. C., Salazar, C., Oberhelman, R., Hollm-Delgado, M.-G., LaChira, D., Escombe, A. R., & Friedland, J. S.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2006-10-12
Volume
355
Issue
15
Pages
1539-1550
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W1976685136
Cited by
468
References
3
FWCI
24.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Microscopic-Observation Drug-Susceptibility Assay for the Diagnosis of TB. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa055524
The paper
Moore, D. A. J., Evans, C. A. W., Gilman, R. H., Caviedes, L., Coronel, J., Vivar, A., Sanchez, E., Piñedo, Y., Saravia, J. C., Salazar, C., Oberhelman, R., Hollm-Delgado, M.-G., LaChira, D., Escombe, A. R., & Friedland, J. S. (2006). Microscopic-Observation Drug-Susceptibility Assay for the Diagnosis of TB. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa055524

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.