ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Evaluation of the 2020 American Urological Association Microscopic Hematuria Guidelines in Clinical Practice: Retrospective Chart Review Analysis.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. 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.
- Low grade T1 non-muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma in pediatric patient: A rare case report and management dilemma.Urology case reports · 2026Article
- The "Futile Labour" Paradox: occupational physical activity fails to offset diabetes burden and is associated with microvascular stress signals in rural older adults.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hematuria is one of the most common urologic diseases seen within clinical practice, with a prevalence range of 1.7%-31.1%. In 2020, American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines were revised and recommend that following initial evaluation, clinicians should categorize patients into three tiers (low risk, intermediate risk, and high risk) based on various factors. Recent literature has shown that the AUA guidelines have high clinical utility when compared to other international guidelines such as those outlined by the Hematuria Risk Index, Canadian Urological Association, and Kaiser Permanente; however, this guideline remains unvalidated among the population of "well adults" within the United States. Objective: We used a retrospective study design to evaluate data abstracted from the electronic medical records of patients seen in the Emory Healthcare Executive Health Clinic from September 29, 2017, to January 29, 2021, to investigate the utility of risk stratification as a tool for clinical decision-making. Methods: According to the AUA risk stratification system, patients were stratified into low-risk and intermediate-risk/high-risk groups based on sex, age, smoking history, history of gross hematuria, and red blood cells/high-powered field. The frequencies and percentages of different causes of hematuria across the three risk strata were reported. Results: Of the 882 instances of red blood cells in urine (URBC) ≥3, a total of 368 (41.72%) underwent a repeat analysis within a 6-month time span, 184 (20.86%) within a 12-month time span, and 330 (37.41%) at >12 months. Instances of a URBC <3 (N=1643) were more likely to have no urologic diagnosis-1503 (91.48%) in comparison to 633 (76.27%) for those instances with a URBC >3 (N=830). Ultimately, 23 (100%) participants in the low-risk group had no urologic diagnosis after urinalysis versus 608 (75.62%) in the intermediate-risk/high-risk group (N=804). Conclusions: We found a need for a greater focus on monitoring elevated URBC counts, in accordance with clinical guidelines for managing hematuria in low-risk patients. Future research should examine the impact of risk stratification on clinical decisions and access to care, especially in underserved populations. It should also assess how the new AUA guidelines affect physician referral patterns and explore real-world implementation challenges and facilitators.
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.