Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 530

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Special Article: National Surveillance of Dialysis‐Associated Diseases in the United States, 2002

Finelli, Lyn, Miller, Jeremy T., Tokars, Jerome I., Alter, Miriam J., Arduino, Matthew J.·2005·Seminars in Dialysis

Abstract

In December 2002, all U.S. chronic hemodialysis centers were surveyed regarding selected patient care practices and dialysis‐associated diseases. The results were compared with similar surveys conducted in previous years. In 2002, 85% of hemodialysis centers were free‐standing and 81% operated for profit; the proportion of centers operating for profit has increased each year since 1985. During 1995–2002, the percentage of patients who received dialysis through central catheters increased from 13% to 26%; this trend is worrisome, as infections and antimicrobial use are higher among patients receiving dialysis through catheters. However, during the same period, the percentage of patients receiving dialysis through fistulas increased from 22% to 33%. The percentage of centers reporting one or more patients infected or colonized with vancomycin‐resistant enterococci (VRE) increased from 12% in 1995 to 30% in 2002. During 1997–2002, the percentage of patients vaccinated against hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection increased from 47% to 56% and the percentage of staff vaccinated increased from 87% to 90%. In 2002, routine testing for antibody to hepatitis C virus (anti‐HCV) was performed on patients at 64% of centers; anti‐HCV was found in 7.8% of patients. In 2001, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) published Recommendations for Preventing Transmission of Infections among Chronic Hemodialysis Patients. Centers were surveyed regarding their awareness of the recommendations and about a variety of infection control practices. In general, the incidence of HBV and HCV was not substantially different for the infection control practices evaluated, including where staff obtain clean supplies for patient treatment, reuse of unused and unopened supplies, and practices for changing external transducer filters/protectors. However, in 2002, the incidence of HBV infection was higher among patients in centers where injectable medications were prepared on a medication cart or medication area located in the treatment area compared to a dedicated medication room. Also, those centers that used a disposable container versus a nondisposable container for priming the dialyzer had a significantly lower incidence of HCV.

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 · 10.1111/j.1525-139x.2005.18108.x

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Cited by

See all 530

Metadata

Authors
Finelli, L., Miller, J. T., Tokars, J. I., Alter, M. J., & Arduino, M. J.
Venue
Seminars in Dialysis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-01
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
52-61
ISSN
  • 0894-0959 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-139X
OpenAlex
W2128428904
Cited by
530
References
5
FWCI
28.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Special Article: National Surveillance of Dialysis‐Associated Diseases in the United States, 2002. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1525-139x.2005.18108.x
The paper
Finelli, L., Miller, J. T., Tokars, J. I., Alter, M. J., & Arduino, M. J. (2005). Special Article: National Surveillance of Dialysis‐Associated Diseases in the United States, 2002. Seminars in Dialysis. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-139x.2005.18108.x

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.