SynthesisBMC family practice2016
Urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review.
Synthesis in BMC family practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Urine collection devices to reduce contamination in urine samples for diagnosis of uncomplicated UTI: a single-blind randomised controlled trial in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Trial
- Usability, Safety, and Diagnostic Reliability of an Automated Urinary Suction Device in Diaper-Dependent Older Adults.International neurourology journal · 2026Article
- Comparison of Urobiome and Urine pH in Women with or without Overactive Bladder Symptoms.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Spaceflight and Medical Microbiology: Possible Implications for Standard Infection Diagnostics and Therapy.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Prevalence of Urine Culture Contamination in a Primary Care Outpatient Setting in Muscat, Oman:Sultan Qaboos University medical journal · 2025Article
- A Pilot Study on the Impact of Cranberry and Ascorbic Acid Supplementation on the Urinary Microbiome of Healthy Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Effects of Diet, Dietary Supplements, Drugs and Exercise on Physical, Diagnostic Values of Urine Characteristics.Nutrients · 2024Review
- Article
- Midstream versus first-void urine samples.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- Urinalysis Using a Diaper-Based Testing Device.Biosensors · 2020Article
- Anthocyanins in Blueberries Grown in Hot Climate Exert Strong Antioxidant Activity and May Be Effective against Urinary Tract Bacteria.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Bacteriophages of the lower urinary tract.Nature reviews. Urology · 2019Review
- Sampling of urine for diagnosing urinary tract infection in general practice - First-void or mid-stream urine?Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2019Article
- Rapid Filter-Based Detection and Culture of Burkholderia pseudomallei from Small Volumes of Urine.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2017Article
- Urinary incontinence in women.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2017Review
- Clinical accuracy of point-of-care urine culture in general practice.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChoice of urine sampling technique in urinary tract infection may impact diagnostic accuracy and thus lead to possible over- or undertreatment. Currently no evidencebased consensus exists regarding correct sampling technique of urine from women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in primary care. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of urine culture from different sampling-techniques in symptomatic non-pregnant women in primary care.
methodsA systematic review was conducted by searching Medline and Embase for clinical studies conducted in primary care using a randomized or paired design to compare the result of urine culture obtained with two or more collection techniques in adult, female, non-pregnant patients with symptoms of urinary tract infection. We evaluated quality of the studies and compared accuracy based on dichotomized outcomes.
resultsWe included seven studies investigating urine sampling technique in 1062 symptomatic patients in primary care. Mid-stream-clean-catch had a positive predictive value of 0.79 to 0.95 and a negative predictive value close to 1 compared to sterile techniques. Two randomized controlled trials found no difference in infection rate between mid-stream-clean-catch, mid-stream-urine and random samples.
conclusionsAt present, no evidence suggests that sampling technique affects the accuracy of the microbiological diagnosis in non-pregnant women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in primary care. However, the evidence presented is in-direct and the difference between mid-stream-clean-catch, mid-stream-urine and random samples remains to be investigated in a paired design to verify the present findings.
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.