Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,119

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical and Laboratory Features of the Nocardia spp. Based on Current Molecular Taxonomy

Open access
Brown-Elliott, Barbara A., Brown, June M., Conville, Patricia S., Wallace, Richard J.·2006·Clinical Microbiology Reviews
DOI 10.1128/cmr.19.2.259-282.2006
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

SUMMARY: The recent explosion of newly described species of Nocardia results from the impact in the last decade of newer molecular technology, including PCR restriction enzyme analysis and 16S rRNA sequencing. These molecular techniques have revolutionized the identification of the nocardiae by providing rapid and accurate identification of recognized nocardiae and, at the same time, revealing new species and a number of yet-to-be-described species. There are currently more than 30 species of nocardiae of human clinical significance, with the majority of isolates being N. nova complex,N. abscessus,N. transvalensis complex,N. farcinica,N. asteroides type VI (N. cyriacigeorgica), and N. brasiliensis. These species cause a wide variety of diseases and have variable drug susceptibilities. Accurate identification often requires referral to a reference laboratory with molecular capabilities, as many newer species are genetically distinct from established species yet have few or no distinguishing phenotypic characteristics. Correct identification is important in deciding the clinical relevance of a species and in the clinical management and treatment of patients with nocardial disease. This review characterizes the currently known pathogenic species of Nocardia, including clinical disease, drug susceptibility, and methods of identification.

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 · 10.1128/cmr.19.2.259-282.2006

Cites

41 of 41 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 41 references

Cited by

See all 1,119

Metadata

Authors
Brown-Elliott, B. A., Brown, J. M., Conville, P. S., & Wallace, R. J.
Venue
Clinical Microbiology Reviews
Publisher
American Society for Microbiology
Published
2006-04
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
259-282
ISSN
  • 0893-8512 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-6618
DOI
10.1128/cmr.19.2.259-282.2006
OpenAlex
W2129706499
Cited by
1,119
References
41
FWCI
35.39
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: Clinical and Laboratory Features of the Nocardia spp. Based on Current Molecular Taxonomy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/cmr.19.2.259-282.2006
The paper
Brown-Elliott, B. A., Brown, J. M., Conville, P. S., & Wallace, R. J. (2006). Clinical and Laboratory Features of the Nocardia spp. Based on Current Molecular Taxonomy. Clinical Microbiology Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.19.2.259-282.2006

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.