ArticleBMC infectious diseases2021
Accuracy of urine flow cytometry and urine test strip in predicting relevant bacteriuria in different patient populations.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reducing culture underestimation in urine: flow cytometry-guided validation of low-dose DTT pre-treatment for biofilm dispersal.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Urinary Cells Flow Cytometry in Renal Disease: A Systematic Review of Diagnostic and Prognostic Applications.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Laser-Induced Graphene-Based Potentiometric pH and Nonenzymatic Uric Acid Sensors for Urine Analysis on Baby Diaper.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Multivariable Urine Flow Cytometry-Based Screening for Prediction of Urine Culture Positivity.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Flow cytometry for screening and prioritisation of urine samples: a retrospective comparison with culture.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Article
- Predicting urine culture results in candidates for lithotripsy.Current urology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUrinary tract infection (UTI) is diagnosed combining urinary symptoms with demonstration of urine culture growth above a given threshold. Our aim was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of Urine Flow Cytometry (UFC) with urine test strip in predicting bacterial growth and in identifying contaminated urine samples, and to derive an algorithm to identify relevant bacterial growth for clinical use.
methodsSpecies identification and colony-forming unit (CFU/ml) quantification from bacterial cultures were matched to corresponding cellular (leucocytes/epithelial cells) and bacteria counts per μl. Results comprise samples analysed between 2013 and 2015 for which urine culture (reference standard) and UFC and urine test strip data (index tests, Sysmex UX-2000) were available.
results47,572 urine samples of 26,256 patients were analysed. Bacteria counts used to predict bacterial growth of ≥10
conclusionsPrediction of a relevant bacterial growth by bacteria counts was most accurate and was a better predictor than leucocyte counts independently of the source of the urine and the medical specialty ordering the test (medical, surgical or others).
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.