ReviewCurrent urology reports2024
Smart Diagnosis of Urinary Tract Infections: is Artificial Intelligence the Fast-Lane Solution?
Review in Current urology reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence in the Assessment of Males with Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: An Up-to-Date UPOINTS-Based Narrative Mapping Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Rapid diagnostics innovations for urinary tract infections using molecular biology, artificial intelligence and antimicrobial resistance surveillance: a comprehensive review.Molecular biology reports · 2026Review
- Development and internal validation of a clinical prediction model for postoperative urinary tract infection in older surgical patients: a retrospective cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Multifactor machine learning models for predicting urinary tract infections: a pilot study.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Diagnostic tests for urinary tract infections and antimicrobial resistance-a reality check between diagnostic innovation and implementation: a critical narrative review.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
- The impact of artificial intelligence on the prescribing, selection, resistance, and stewardship of antimicrobials: a scoping review.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Application of Machine Learning Algorithms in Urinary Tract Infections Diagnosis Based on Non-Microbiological Parameters.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Artificial Neural Network for the Fast Screening of Samples from Suspected Urinary Tract Infections.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Validation of an Algorithm to Classify Urine Cultures in Family Medicine.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Urinary Bladder Acute Inflammations and Nephritis of the Renal Pelvis: Diagnosis Using Fine-Tuned Large Language Models.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Machine learning models to predict systemic inflammatory response syndrome after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.BMC urology · 2024Article
- Review of non-antibiotic treatment and prevention of recurrent UTIs - a summary of current guidance and suggested treatment algorithm.Therapeutic advances in infectious diseaseArticle
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewArtificial intelligence (AI) can significantly improve physicians' workflow when examining patients with UTI. However, most contemporary reviews are focused on examining the usage of AI with a restricted quantity of data, analyzing only a subset of AI algorithms, or performing narrative work without analyzing all dedicated studies. Given the preceding, the goal of this work was to conduct a mini-review to determine the current state of AI-based systems as a support in UTI diagnosis. RECENT
findingsThere are sufficient publications to comprehend the potential applications of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of UTIs. Existing research in this field, in general, publishes performance metrics that are exemplary. However, upon closer inspection, many of the available publications are burdened with flaws associated with the improper use of artificial intelligence, such as the use of a small number of samples, their lack of heterogeneity, and the absence of external validation. AI-based models cannot be classified as full-fledged physician assistants in diagnosing UTIs due to the fact that these limitations and flaws represent only a portion of all potential obstacles. Instead, such studies should be evaluated as exploratory, with a focus on the importance of future work that complies with all rules governing the use of AI. AI algorithms have demonstrated their potential for UTI diagnosis. However, further studies utilizing large, heterogeneous, prospectively collected datasets, as well as external validations, are required to define the actual clinical workflow value of artificial intelligence.
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.