Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 213

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microbiological Laboratory Testing in the Diagnosis of Fungal Infections in Pulmonary and Critical Care Practice. An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Open access
Hage, Chadi A., Carmona, Eva M., Epelbaum, Oleg, Evans, Scott E., Gabe, Luke M., Haydour, Qusay, Knox, Kenneth S., Kolls, Jay K., Murad, M. Hassan, Wengenack, Nancy L., Limper, Andrew H.·2019·American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

Abstract Background Fungal infections are of increasing incidence and importance in immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients. Timely diagnosis relies on appropriate use of laboratory testing in susceptible patients. Methods The relevant literature related to diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, invasive candidiasis, and the common endemic mycoses was systematically reviewed. Meta-analysis was performed when appropriate. Recommendations were developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Results This guideline includes specific recommendations on the use of galactomannan testing in serum and BAL and for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, the role of PCR in the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, the role of β-d-glucan assays in the diagnosis of invasive candidiasis, and the application of serology and antigen testing in the diagnosis of the endemic mycoses. Conclusions Rapid, accurate diagnosis of fungal infections relies on appropriate application of laboratory testing, including antigen testing, serological testing, and PCR-based assays.

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 · 10.1164/rccm.201906-1185st

Cites

7 of 7 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 7 references

Cited by

See all 213

Metadata

Authors
Hage, C. A., Carmona, E. M., Epelbaum, O., Evans, S. E., Gabe, L. M., Haydour, Q., Knox, K. S., Kolls, J. K., Murad, M. H., Wengenack, N. L., & Limper, A. H.
Venue
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Published
2019-09-01
Volume
200
Issue
5
Pages
535-550
ISSN
  • 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-4970
OpenAlex
W2970407094
Cited by
213
References
7
FWCI
16.65
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: Microbiological Laboratory Testing in the Diagnosis of Fungal Infections in Pulmonary and Critical Care Practice. An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/rccm.201906-1185st
The paper
Hage, C. A., Carmona, E. M., Epelbaum, O., Evans, S. E., Gabe, L. M., Haydour, Q., Knox, K. S., Kolls, J. K., Murad, M. H., Wengenack, N. L., & Limper, A. H. (2019). Microbiological Laboratory Testing in the Diagnosis of Fungal Infections in Pulmonary and Critical Care Practice. An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201906-1185st

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.