ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2024
Lodestar DX, an evaluation: loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) for the diagnosis of urinary tract infection in symptomatic adult females.
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2024. 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.
- A rapid ionic liquid-based DNA extraction method for molecular diagnostics of urinary tract infections.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Lodestar DX: a comparison with traditional culture for the detection of bacteriuria in the workup of urinary tract infection.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Over 404.6 million people are affected worldwide each year by urinary tract infections (UTIs), with ∼237 000 associated deaths globally in 2019. Much more common in women than men, acute UTI occurs in up to 50% of the female population. Despite this, there is a lack of good diagnostic tools for use at the point-of-care, and over- and under-diagnosis are common, leading to long-term complications and patient suffering, and driving the spread of antimicrobial resistance through insufficient appropriate antibiotic stewardship. Objectives: To evaluate the performance of a novel point-of-care testing platform, Lodestar DX, in comparison with standard laboratory processing of urine specimens. Methods: A total of 199 fresh urine samples from symptomatic adult females suspected of having an acute UTI were tested using Lodestar DX and the results compared with standard laboratory methods performed at a local microbiology laboratory. Results: Using standard laboratory methods, 129/199 samples produced a result and could be compared. Overall sensitivity and specificity of Lodestar DX were 88.1% (95% CI: 77.8%-94.7%) and 83.9% (95% CI: 72.3%-92.0%), respectively ( Conclusions: The results show good correlation between Lodestar DX results and those of the standard laboratory method for this patient group. However, the platform would benefit from further testing to establish its true point-of-care compatibility and a direct comparison between this and other testing methods, such as urine dipstick testing.
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.