Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 182

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

Revisiting tuberculous pleurisy: pleural fluid characteristics and diagnostic yield of mycobacterial culture in an endemic area

Open access
Ruan, Sheng-Yuan, Chuang, Yu-Chung, Wang, Jann-Yuan, Lin, Jou-Wei, Chien, Jung-Yien, Huang, Chun-Ta, Kuo, Yao-Wen, Lee, Li-Na, Yu, Chong-Jen J·2012·Thorax

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tuberculous pleurisy is traditionally indicated by extreme lymphocytosis in pleural fluid and low yield of effusion culture. However, there is considerable inconsistency among previous study results. In addition, these data should be updated due to early effusion studies and advances in culture methods. METHODS: From January 2004 to June 2009, patients with tuberculous pleurisy were retrospectively identified from the mycobacteriology laboratories and the pathology and tuberculosis registration databases of two hospitals in Taiwan where tuberculosis is endemic. Pleural fluid characteristics and yields of mycobacterial cultures using liquid media were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 382 patients with tuberculous pleurisy were identified. The median lymphocyte percentage of total cells in pleural fluids was 84% (IQR 64-95%) and 17% of cases had a lymphocyte percentage of <50%. The lymphocyte percentage was negatively associated with the probability of a positive effusion culture (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.96 to 0.99). The diagnostic yields were 63% for effusion culture, 48% for sputum culture, 79% for the combination of effusion and sputum cultures, and 74% for histological examination of pleural biopsy specimens. CONCLUSION: The degree of lymphocyte predominance in tuberculous pleurisy was lower than was previously thought. The lymphocyte percentage in pleural fluid was negatively associated with the probability of a positive effusion culture. With the implementation of a liquid culture method, the sensitivity of effusion culture was much higher than has been previously reported, and the combination of effusion and sputum cultures provided a good diagnostic yield.

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 · 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2011-201363

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 182

Metadata

Authors
Ruan, S.-Y., Chuang, Y.-C., Wang, J.-Y., Lin, J.-W., Chien, J.-Y., Huang, C.-T., Kuo, Y.-W., Lee, L.-N., & Yu, C.-J. J.
Venue
Thorax
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2012-03-21
Volume
67
Issue
9
Pages
822-827
ISSN
  • 0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3296
OpenAlex
W2166545665
Cited by
182
References
3
FWCI
7.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Revisiting tuberculous pleurisy: pleural fluid characteristics and diagnostic yield of mycobacterial culture in an endemic area. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2011-201363
The paper
Ruan, S.-Y., Chuang, Y.-C., Wang, J.-Y., Lin, J.-W., Chien, J.-Y., Huang, C.-T., Kuo, Y.-W., Lee, L.-N., & Yu, C.-J. J. (2012). Revisiting tuberculous pleurisy: pleural fluid characteristics and diagnostic yield of mycobacterial culture in an endemic area. Thorax. https://doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2011-201363

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.