ArticleBMC microbiology2023
The impact of urine collection method on canine urinary microbiota detection: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of sample processing method and volume on 16 S rRNA profiling of the urobiome.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Stability of Nε-Carboxymethyllysine and Nε-Carboxyethyllysine in Canine Urine Under Extended Room Temperature Storage.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Subclinical bacteriuria and pyuria in companion animals without signs of lower urinary tract disease: prevalence and associations in a prospective cross-sectional study using multimodal analytics.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2026Article
- Characterization and comparative analysis of urinary bacterial microbiome profiling in healthy cats and cats with feline idiopathic cystitis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Methodological bias shapes the interpretation of the urinary microbiome in low-biomass systems.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Microbial Interconnections in One Health: A Critical Nexus Between Companion Animals and Human Microbiomes.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Chemical Sensors and Biosensors for Point-of-Care Testing of Pets: Opportunities for Individualized Diagnostics of Companion Animals.ACS sensors · 2025Review
- Evidence for an indigenous female mouse urobiome.PloS one · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the vaginal and urinary microbiota of healthy cycling bitches.BMC veterinary research · 2024Article
- Dietary Features Are Associated with Differences in the Urinary Microbiome in Clinically Healthy Adult Dogs.Veterinary sciences · 2024Article
- Gut and Urinary Microbiota in Cats with Kidney Stones.Microorganisms · 2024Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe urinary tract harbors unique microbial communities that play important roles in urogenital health and disease. Dogs naturally suffer from several of the same urological disorders as humans (e.g., urinary tract infections, neoplasia, urolithiasis) and represent a valuable translational model for studying the role of urinary microbiota in various disease states. Urine collection technique represents a critical component of urinary microbiota research study design. However, the impact of collection method on the characterization of the canine urinary microbiota remains unknown. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine whether urine collection technique alters the microbial populations detected in canine urine samples. Urine was collected from asymptomatic dogs by both cystocentesis and midstream voiding. Microbial DNA was isolated from each sample and submitted for amplicon sequencing of the V4 region of the bacterial 16 S rRNA gene, followed by analyses to compare microbial diversity and composition between urine collection techniques.
resultsSamples collected via midstream voiding exhibited significantly higher sequence read counts (P = .036) and observed richness (P = .0024) than cystocentesis urine. Bray Curtis and Unweighted UniFrac measures of beta diversity showed distinct differences in microbial composition by collection method (P = .0050, R
conclusionMicrobial composition differs in canine urine samples collected via cystocentesis as compared to those collected via midstream voiding. Future researchers should select a single urine collection method based on the biological question of interest when designing canine urinary microbiota studies. Additionally, the authors suggest caution when interpreting results across studies that did not utilize identical urine collection methods.
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.