The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Detection of Chlamydia pneumoniae by polymerase chain reaction
Open accessAbstract
While criteria for serodiagnosis of Chlamydia pneumoniae infection are well established, isolation of the organism is often difficult. To increase detection of this organism, C. pneumoniae-specific sequences were identified to permit amplification of C. pneumoniae by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). A cloned C. pneumoniae 474-bp PstI fragment was shown by dot blot and Southern hybridization to differentiate C. pneumoniae from the other Chlamydia spp., react with all C. pneumoniae isolates tested, and not recognize DNA from normal throat flora or common respiratory tract agents. This cloned fragment was sequenced and primers for use in PCR were chosen on the bases of GenBank analysis, G + C ratio, and absence of secondary structure. All C. pneumoniae isolates tested were amplified by the HL-1-HR-1 primer pair or the HM-1-HR-1 primer pair, producing the expected 437- and 229-bp amplification products, respectively. None of the Chlamydia trachomatis serovars (B/TW-5/OT, C/TW-3/OT, D/UW-3/Cx, E/UW-5/Cx, F/UW-6/Cx, H/UW-4/Cx, I/UW-12/Ur, and L2/434/Bu), Chlamydia psittaci strains (Mn, 6BC, GPIC, FP, and OA), HeLa cells, or other organisms tested were amplified. Reaction conditions including MgCl2, oligonucleotides, and primer concentrations and temperature were optimized before application to clinical samples. Clinical specimens from patients from whom C. pneumoniae was isolated were also positive by PCR, while samples from patients with known C. trachomatis or C. psittaci infection were not amplified by PCR.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Saiki, R. K., Scharf, S., Faloona, F., Mullis, K. B., Horn, G. T., Erlich, H. A., & Arnheim, N. (1985) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.2999980 · Cited by 8,956
Cited by
Kuo, C. C., Jackson, L. A., Campbell, L. A., & Grayston, J. T. (1995) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.8.4.451 · Cited by 819
Self-citationLoeb, M., McGeer, A., McArthur, M., Walter, S., & Simor, A. E. (1999) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.159.17.2058 · Cited by 346
Detection of Chlamydia pneumoniae TWAR in Human Coronary Atherectomy Tissues
Campbell, L. A., O'Brien, E. R., Cappuccio, A. L., Kuo, C.-C., Wang, S.-P., Stewart, D., Patton, D. L., Cummings, P. K., & Grayston, J. T. (1995) · Journal of Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/infdis/172.2.585 · Cited by 346
Self-citationFailure To Detect Chlamydia pneumoniae in the Late-Onset Alzheimer's Brain
Ring, R. H., & Lyons, J. M. (2000) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.38.7.2591-2594.2000 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- Campbell, L. A., Perez Melgosa, M., Hamilton, D. J., Kuo, C. C., & Grayston, J. T.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 1992-02
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 434-439
- ISSN
- 0095-1137 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-660X
- OpenAlex
- W1634406801
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.43
- 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: Detection of Chlamydia pneumoniae by polymerase chain reaction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/jcm.30.2.434-439.1992
- The paper
- Campbell, L. A., Perez Melgosa, M., Hamilton, D. J., Kuo, C. C., & Grayston, J. T. (1992). Detection of Chlamydia pneumoniae by polymerase chain reaction. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.30.2.434-439.1992
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.