ReviewCureus2026
Urinary Tract Infection in Neurologic Patients Undergoing Intermittent Catheterization: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Catheter Type and Technique.
Review in Cureus, 2026. 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
Intermittent urinary catheterization (IUC) is one of the recommended methods for bladder emptying in patients with bladder disorders. To our knowledge, no meta-analysis has yet evaluated the risk of urinary tract infections (UTIs) in adult neurological patients according to the type of catheter and IUC method. To address this knowledge gap, a systematic review of the literature was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Trials CENTRAL databases, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. We included randomized clinical trials and cohort studies comparing at least two types of catheters and/or two IUC strategies in adult patients. Only studies published in French or English were considered. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the pooled effect size across studies. Publication bias was assessed using the Luis Furuya-Kanamori (LFK) index and the Doi plot. All statistical analyses were performed using R software, version 4.3.2 (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023481012). Nine studies were included in the systematic review, of which seven (six randomized controlled trials and one cohort study) were eligible for meta-analysis. The estimated pooled odds ratio based on the random-effects model was 0.53 (95% CI: 0.34-0.84), with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 49%). Publication bias was substantial. These findings suggest that hydrophilic catheters are associated with a lower risk of symptomatic UTI compared with uncoated ones. Further research is needed to evaluate reusable catheter strategies, considering economic and environmental factors.
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.