ReviewCureus2025
Evaluating the Role of Urine Cytology in Haematuria One-Stop Clinics: A Scoping Review of Current Evidence and Clinical Utility.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urine cytology has traditionally been part of haematuria assessment pathways for detecting high-grade urothelial carcinoma, particularly carcinoma in situ (CIS), but its value within modern Haematuria One-Stop Clinics (HOSCs) is increasingly debated in light of new diagnostic approaches, economic pressures, and updated international guidelines. This scoping review takes into account current evidence and recommendations from the American Urological Association (AUA), European Association of Urology (EAU), British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS), and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), drawing on four extensive peer-reviewed studies to assess the diagnostic accuracy, clinical relevance, and cost-effectiveness of urine cytology in one-stop haematuria models. Across all major guidelines, there is consensus that urine cytology should not be routinely used in the initial evaluation of haematuria, with selective use reserved for patients at risk of CIS or with equivocal cystoscopy findings. While cystoscopy and cross-sectional imaging remain the principal diagnostic tools, variation in practice persists, particularly in the UK, due to established custom, resource limitations, and medico-legal considerations. Urine cytology retains a limited, targeted role in detecting high-grade disease, but its routine use in HOSCs lacks robust supporting evidence; standardising practice in line with international guidance will promote risk-stratified, cost-effective, and consistent haematuria management.
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.