ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2023
Alterations in urinary microbiota composition in urolithiasis patients: insights from 16S rRNA gene sequencing.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of sample processing method and volume on 16 S rRNA profiling of the urobiome.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Beyond Infection: How Antimicrobial Therapies Influence the Urinary Microbiome and Stone Disease.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The gut-kidney axis in urolithiasis: roles of gut microbiota, metabolites, and therapeutic implications.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Unraveling the association of bacteria and urinary stones in patients with urolithiasis: an update review article.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the urinary microbiota composition in urolithiasis patients compared to healthy controls and to identify potential microbial markers and their association with clinical parameters. Methods: A total of 66 samples, comprising 45 from urolithiasis patients and 21 from healthy controls, were analyzed. 16S rRNA gene sequencing was employed to determine the microbiota composition. Various statistical and bioinformatics tools, including ANOVA, PCoA, and LEfSe, were utilized to analyze the sequencing data and identify significant differences in microbial abundance. Results: No significant demographic differences were observed between the two groups. Post-quality control, clean tags ranged from 60,979 to 68,736. Significant differences in α-diversity were observed between the two groups. β-diversity analysis revealed distinct clustering of the urinary microbiota in urolithiasis patients and controls. Notably, Ruminococcaceae was predominant in urolithiasis samples, while Proteobacteria was more prevalent in healthy samples. Lactobacillus was significantly overrepresented in samples from healthy females. Conclusion: The urinary microbiota composition in urolithiasis patients is distinct from that of healthy controls. Specific microbial taxa, such as Ruminococcaceae and Proteobacteria, could serve as potential biomarkers for urolithiasis. The findings pave the way for further exploration of the role of microbiota in urolithiasis and the development of microbiome-based therapeutic strategies.
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.