The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluation of the MicroSeq System for Identification of Mycobacteria by 16S Ribosomal DNA Sequencing and Its Integration into a Routine Clinical Mycobacteriology Laboratory
Open accessAbstract
An evaluation of the MicroSeq 500 microbial identification system by nucleic acid sequencing and the Mayo Clinic experience with its integration into a routine clinical laboratory setting are described. Evaluation of the MicroSeq 500 microbial identification system was accomplished with 59 American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) strains and 328 clinical isolates of mycobacteria identified by conventional and 16S ribosomal DNA sequencing by using the MicroSeq 500 microbial identification system. Nucleic acid sequencing identified 58 of 59 (98.3%) ATCC strains to the species level or to the correct group or complex level. The identification results for 219 of 243 clinical isolates (90.1%) with a distance score of <1% were concordant with the identifications made by phenotypic methods. The remaining 85 isolates had distance scores of >1%; 35 (41.1%) were identified to the appropriate species level or group or complex level; 13 (15.3%) were identified to the species level. All 85 isolates were determined to be mycobacterial species, either novel species or species that exhibited significant genotypic divergence from an organism in the database with the closest match. Integration of nucleic acid sequencing into the routine mycobacteriology laboratory and use of the MicroSeq 500 microbial identification system and Mayo Clinic databases containing additional genotypes of common species and added species significantly reduced the number of organisms that could not be identified by phenotypic methods. The turnaround time was shortened to 24 h, and results were reported much earlier. A limited number of species could not be differentiated from one another by 16S ribosomal DNA sequencing; however, the method provides for the identification of unusual species and more accurate identifications and offers the promise of being the most accurate method available.
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
Cited by
Griffith, D. E., Aksamit, T., Brown-Elliott, B. A., Catanzaro, A., Daley, C., Gordin, F., Holland, S. M., Horsburgh, R., Huitt, G., Iademarco, M. F., et al. (2007) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.200604-571st · Cited by 6,110
Song, Y., Liu, C., Bolaňos, M., Lee, J., McTeague, M., & Finegold, S. M. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.43.4.1531-1537.2005 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Hall, L., Doerr, K. A., Wohlfiel, S. L., & Roberts, G. D.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2003-04
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1447-1453
- ISSN
- 0095-1137 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-660X
- OpenAlex
- W2128067448
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.42
- 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: Evaluation of the MicroSeq System for Identification of Mycobacteria by 16S Ribosomal DNA Sequencing and Its Integration into a Routine Clinical Mycobacteriology Laboratory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/jcm.41.4.1447-1453.2003
- The paper
- Hall, L., Doerr, K. A., Wohlfiel, S. L., & Roberts, G. D. (2003). Evaluation of the MicroSeq System for Identification of Mycobacteria by 16S Ribosomal DNA Sequencing and Its Integration into a Routine Clinical Mycobacteriology Laboratory. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.41.4.1447-1453.2003
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.