Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical relevance of non-tuberculous mycobacteria isolated in the Nijmegen-Arnhem region, The Netherlands

Open access
van Ingen, J, Bendien, S A, de Lange, W C M, Hoefsloot, W, Dekhuijzen, P N R, Boeree, M J, van Soolingen, D·2009·Thorax

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The frequency of clinical isolation of non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) in the Netherlands is increasing, but its clinical relevance is often uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency and clinical relevance of isolation of NTM in four associated hospitals in a single region in the Netherlands. METHODS: Medical files of all patients from whom NTM were isolated between January 1999 and January 2005 were reviewed retrospectively. Diagnostic criteria for non-tuberculous mycobacterial disease published by the American Thoracic Society (ATS) were used to determine clinical relevance. RESULTS: 232 patients were found, from whom NTM were isolated from the respiratory tract in 91% of cases. Patients were mostly white men, with an average age of 60 years and pre-existing pulmonary disease. Fifty-three of 212 patients (25%) with pulmonary isolates met the ATS diagnostic criteria for pulmonary NTM disease; this percentage differed by species. Most patients were treated with rifampicin, ethambutol and clarithromycin. Treatment outcome for pulmonary NTM disease was suboptimal but differed by species: overall, improvement was seen in 67% of treated patients, but in only 50% of those with pulmonary M avium disease. Lymphadenitis was the most common extrapulmonary disease type. CONCLUSIONS: Twenty-five per cent of all patients with pulmonary NTM isolates met the ATS criteria. Clinical relevance differs by species. NTM isolation increases over time. Species distribution differs from that of neighbouring countries and the M avium complex isolates have traits different from those reported in the USA. Adherence to diagnostic and treatment guidelines can be improved.

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/thx.2008.110957

Cites

14 of 14 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 14 references

Metadata

Authors
van Ingen, J., Bendien, S. A., de Lange, W. C. M., Hoefsloot, W., Dekhuijzen, P. N. R., Boeree, M. J., & van Soolingen, D.
Venue
Thorax
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2009-02-12
Volume
64
Issue
6
Pages
502-506
ISSN
0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2170708302
Cited by
266
References
14
FWCI
10.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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 relevance of non-tuberculous mycobacteria isolated in the Nijmegen-Arnhem region, The Netherlands. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/thx.2008.110957
The paper
van Ingen, J., Bendien, S. A., de Lange, W. C. M., Hoefsloot, W., Dekhuijzen, P. N. R., Boeree, M. J., & van Soolingen, D. (2009). Clinical relevance of non-tuberculous mycobacteria isolated in the Nijmegen-Arnhem region, The Netherlands. Thorax. https://doi.org/10.1136/thx.2008.110957

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.