ArticlePediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany)2005
Urine collection pads: are samples reliable for urine biochemistry and microscopy?
Article in Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany), 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A novel urine collection device for accurate urinary measurements in neonates and pre-continent infants.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Urine collection methods and dipstick testing in non-toilet-trained children.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2021Review
- Expressing urine from a gel disposable diaper for biomonitoring using phthalates as an example.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2012Article
- 6-sulfatoxymelatonin collected from infant diapers: feasibility and implications for urinary biochemical markers.Biological research for nursing · 2010Article
- Urine collected from diapers can be used for 2-D PAGE in infants and young children.Proteomics. Clinical applications · 2009Article
- Reliability of urine collection pads for routine and metabolic biochemistry in infants and young children.European journal of pediatrics · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to validate the reliability of samples obtained with urine collection pads (UCP) for selected laboratory biochemical analyses, urine cell microscopy, and bedside semi-quantitative stick urinalysis. A series of laboratory experiments was performed to test agreement between urine concentrations, or results, before and after passage through a UCP (incubated for 37 degrees C for 15 min). The following urinalyses were performed: electrolytes, calcium, phosphate, urate, osmolality, pH, protein, catecholamines, toxicology for drugs of abuse, stick urinalysis for glucose, ketones, protein, blood, leucocytes and nitrites, and microscopy for red and white cells. Close agreement was shown for all laboratory analyses except proteinuria, which was underestimated by, on average, 10% after UCP passage. However, stick urinalysis for proteinuria remains sufficiently reliable for clinical use. UCP substantially retain or destroy red and white cells, but stick urinalysis for blood and leucocyte esterase remains reliable. In conclusion, urine samples derived from UCP show good agreement across a clinically relevant range for the biochemical analyses undertaken in this study. Microscopy of UCP samples is unreliable for cellular material but semi-quantitative stick urinalysis for red and white cells is a satisfactory alternative.
Indexed as
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.