Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2023
Experiences of urine collection devices during suspected urinary tract infections: a qualitative study in primary care.
Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Alterations in urinary microbiota composition in children with overactive bladder: insights from 16S rRNA gene sequencing.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Is South Africa ready for point-of-care, non-sputum tests for TB diagnosis? An assessment of end-user perceptions on a novel urine test and tongue swab for TB testing.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUp to 30% of urine samples from women with suspected urinary tract infection (UTI) are contaminated and need to be repeated, burdening health services and delaying antibiotic prescription. To prevent contamination, midstream urine (MSU) sampling, which can be difficult to achieve, is recommended. Urine collection devices (UCDs) that automatically capture MSU have been proposed as a solution. There are few studies exploring women's experiences of using such devices.
aimTo explore women's experiences of urine collection and the use of UCDs during a suspected UTI. DESIGN AND
settingAn embedded qualitative study in a UK randomised controlled trial (RCT) of UCDs among women attending primary care for UTI symptoms.
methodSemi-structured telephone interviews with 29 women who had participated in the RCT were conducted. The transcribed interviews were then thematically analysed.
resultsMost of the women were dissatisfied with how they normally produced urine samples. Many were able to use the devices, found them hygienic, and would use them again, even if they had initially experienced problems. Women who had not used the devices expressed interest in trying them. Potential barriers to UCD use included positioning for the sample, UTI symptoms making urine collection difficult, and waste disposal because of the single-use plastic in the UCDs.
conclusionMost women agreed there was a need for a user- and environmentally-friendly device to improve urine collection. Although using UCDs can be difficult for women experiencing UTI symptoms, they may be appropriate for asymptomatic sampling in other clinical populations.
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.