ArticleERJ open research2025
Clinical significance of respiratory bacteria and mycobacteria isolates in adult bronchiectasis in Taiwan.
Article in ERJ open research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Unveiling hidden culprits: new perspectives on bronchiectasis pathogens in Taiwan.ERJ open research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The clinical impact of bacterial and mycobacterial isolates on bronchiectasis remains uncertain. Methods: Patients with bronchiectasis at 16 hospitals in Taiwan were recruited with a 1-year follow-up. The patients were classified into six groups: Group 1, Results: In total, 1416 patients (mean age 67 years; 43% males) were included. The mean modified Reiff score was 5 (range 1-18). 59% (829 patients) had sputum, whereas the remaining did not. The proportions of bacteria and NTM cultured from sputum within 1 year of observation were 27% (381/1416) and 15% (202/1416), respectively. The most common bacterial isolate was Conclusion:
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.