Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 325

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

Improved Diagnosis of the Etiology of Community-Acquired Pneumonia with Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction

Open access
Templeton, K. E., Scheltinga, S. A., van den Eeden, W. C. J. F. M., Graffelman, W. A., van den Broek, P. J., Claas, E. C. J.·2005·Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has been shown to be more sensitive than current standard microbiological methods and, therefore, may improve the accuracy of microbiological diagnosis for patients with CAP. METHODS: Conventional detection techniques and multiplex real-time PCR for atypical bacteria and respiratory viruses were performed on samples collected from 105 adults enrolled in a prospective study. An infiltrate was visible on each patient's chest radiograph, and a pneumonia severity index score was determined for each patient. RESULTS: Microbiological diagnoses were determined for 52 (49.5%) of 105 patients by conventional techniques and for 80 (76%) of 105 patients by real-time PCR. The time to obtain the result of real-time PCR could be reduced to 6 h. PCR methodology was significantly more sensitive for the detection of atypical pathogens and viruses (P< or =.001). Respiratory viral infections and mixed infections were detected in 15 (14.2%) and 3 (2.8%) of 105 patients, respectively, by conventional methods, but were detected in 59 (56.2%) and 28 (26.5%) of 105, respectively, by real-time PCR. Presence of a mixed infection was significantly associated with severe pneumonia (P=.002). Human rhinoviruses and coronaviruses, OC43 and 229E, were frequently identified pathogens. CONCLUSIONS: The combined real-time PCR assay is more sensitive for diagnosis of the main viruses and atypical bacteria that cause CAP compared with conventional methods, and obtains results in a clinically relevant time period.

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 · 10.1086/431588

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 325

Metadata

Authors
Templeton, K. E., Scheltinga, S. A., van den Eeden, W. C. J. F. M., Graffelman, W. A., van den Broek, P. J., & Claas, E. C. J.
Venue
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Published
2005-08-01
Volume
41
Issue
3
Pages
345-351
ISSN
  • 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6591
OpenAlex
W2151082975
Cited by
325
References
3
FWCI
11.56
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: Improved Diagnosis of the Etiology of Community-Acquired Pneumonia with Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/431588
The paper
Templeton, K. E., Scheltinga, S. A., van den Eeden, W. C. J. F. M., Graffelman, W. A., van den Broek, P. J., & Claas, E. C. J. (2005). Improved Diagnosis of the Etiology of Community-Acquired Pneumonia with Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction. Clinical Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1086/431588

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.