ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2018
Cleaning the genitalia with plain water improves accuracy of urine dipstick in childhood.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2018. 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.
- Frequency and short-term persistence of haematuria and/or proteinuria in neonates: a cohort study.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Combination therapy (desmopressin plus oxybutynin) improves the response rate compared with desmopressin alone in patients with monosymptomatic nocturnal enuresis and nocturnal polyuria and absence of constipation predict the response to this treatment.European journal of pediatrics · 2023Article
- Contemporary Management of Urinary Tract Infections in Children.Current treatment options in pediatrics · 2022Review
- Pediatric non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and kidney function: Effect ofWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Transmembrane 6 superfamily member 2 167K allele improves renal function in children with obesity.Pediatric research · 2020Article
- In children with urinary tract infection reduced kidney length and vesicoureteric reflux predict abnormal DMSA scan.Pediatric research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated, both in toilet-trained and not-toilet-trained children, the impact of cleaning the genital area with plain water on the false positive rate at urine dipstick, and evaluated which factors could be associated to falsely positive findings. We prospectively enrolled 612 patients consecutively attending our nephro-urological outpatient clinic. Firstly, we performed urine dipsticks on urine samples collected from patients whose genital area had not been cleaned before. Then we collected a second sample from the patients with positive urine dipstick, after their genital area had been cleaned with plain water. The urine dipstick was considered falsely positive if we documented its normalization at urine dipstick made on the urine sample collected after cleaning the genital area. We found a falsely positive urine dipstick in 25.5% of the patients, and more in detail in 22.9% of the not-toilet-trained children, and in 26.6% of the toilet-trained children (p = 0.37). The only factors leading to a significant increased RR to have a false positive were non-retractable foreskin (RR = 4.38; 95% CI, 2.15-8.9; p = 0.0001) and female gender (RR = 2.47; 95% CI, 1.77-3.44; p < 0.0001).
conclusionCleaning the genital area with plain water should always be performed before collecting urine samples, even if only a urine dipstick without culture is needed. What is Known: • Cleaning the genital area reduces the urine bacterial contamination rate in populations of toilet-trained pediatric patients. • There are no studies assessing the impact of cleaning the genital area on the quality of the urine dipstick, nor on which factors could affect the urine dipstick findings. What is New: • Falsely positive urine dipstick was found in 25.5% of the 612 prospectively enrolled toilet-trained and not-toilet-trained children. • Non-retractable foreskin and female gender significantly increases the relative risk of falsely positive urine dipsticks.
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.