Observational studyPloS one2025
A novel method and classification criteria for analyzing urine turbidity and its relationship with urine dry chemical parameters.
Observational study in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Urine color tool for coronary heart disease phenotyping.Scientific reports · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUrine turbidity is a significant diagnostic marker for early screening of urinary tract infections, kidney stones, and other related conditions. However, current methods for analyzing urine turbidity often rely on subjective assessments. This study aims to investigate the relationship between urine turbidity and the urine color values measured by spectrophotometer, providing an objective quantification method for both urine turbidity and urine color, while also exploring the underlying causes of urine turbidity.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among newly enrolled university students undergoing physical examination in Beijing. Basic demographic information and morning urine samples were collected. Urine turbidity was assessed using human visual evaluation and a urine chemical analyzer, while urine color CIE L*a*b* (International Commission on illumination) was measured using a spectrophotometer. Routine urine chemical examination was also performed Correlations among urine turbidity, urine color, and urine dry chemical parameters were analyzed.
resultsA total of 1220 participants (68.7% female, mean age: 23.66 years) were included in the study. Spearman correlation analysis showed that urine turbidity was significantly negatively correlated with L* (lightness) and significantly positively correlated with a* (redness) and b* (yellowness). Regression analysis identified L* as the most affected parameter by urine turbidity (standardized coefficient β=-1.030, p < 0.05). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed that L* was highly effective in distinguishing different urine turbidity levels, with L* < 89.165 achieving excellent sensitivity and specificity (AUC = 0.984) and 96% accuracy in identifying turbid urine. In addition, urine turbidity was positively correlated with urine specific gravity, protein, and urine color (p < 0.05), while its relationship with pH was nonlinear. These findings suggest that multiple factors collectively influence urine turbidity.
conclusionThis study provides a novel and objective approach for assessing urine turbidity, advancing the modernization of urine diagnostic practices in traditional medicine.
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.