Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42237236›Full record

Observational studyBMC geriatrics2026

An observational diagnostic accuracy study comparing the urine dipstick with a consensus-based reference standard for the diagnosis of urinary tract infections in older adults.

Annelies M Baart, Carmen I Oosterkamp, Roseanne S Mc Garrigle, Manu P Bilsen, Laura Cordes Lourenço, Nora El Moussaoui, Leo G Visser, Angela Huttner, Jelle J Goeman, Merel M C Lambregts and 1 more

Abstract readObservational StudyComparative Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC geriatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Annelies M Baart *Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden University Center for Infectious Diseases, Leiden, the Netherlands. a.m.baart@lumc.nl.
Carmen I Oosterkamp *Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden University Center for Infectious Diseases, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Roseanne S Mc GarrigleLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden University Center for Infectious Diseases, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Manu P BilsenLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden University Center for Infectious Diseases, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Laura Cordes LourençoGeneva University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Infectious Diseases Division, Geneva, Switzerland.
Nora El MoussaouiLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden University Center for Infectious Diseases, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Leo G VisserLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden University Center for Infectious Diseases, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Angela HuttnerGeneva University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Infectious Diseases Division, Geneva, Switzerland.
Jelle J GoemanDepartment of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Merel M C LambregtsLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden University Center for Infectious Diseases, Leiden, the Netherlands.
ESCMID Study Group for Urinary tract Infections (ESGUTI)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe urine dipstick is widely used to screen for urinary tract infection (UTI) in daily practice. However, in older adults, especially women, its reliability is limited by the high prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria and leukocyturia. Recently, a consensus-based reference standard was introduced to classify patients based on the likelihood of UTI. Using this standard, we assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the urine dipstick in older adults.

methodsWe performed an observational study using prospectively collected data from two ongoing studies. We included adults aged ≥ 60 years with clinically suspected UTI who underwent dipstick testing, urine flow cytometry, and urine culture during the same episode. The Roche COMBUR-7 urine dipstick served as the index test, and episodes were classified using the consensus-based reference standard. We evaluated all possible dipstick thresholds and their combinations, calculating sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios using Generalized Estimating Equations to account for multiple episodes per participant. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to determine the optimal balance between sensitivity and specificity.

resultsWe included 368 episodes from 199 participants (mean age 73.8 years; 77.9% women). Dipstick sensitivity was 93.6% (95% CI 90.1%-95.9%) and specificity was 58.6% (95% CI 45.4%-70.6%) for the conventional threshold of nitrite + and/or leukocyte esterase ≥ 1 + . A higher threshold, "total of ≥ 2 + " (leukocyte esterase ≥ 2 + or nitrite positive with leukocyte esterase ≥ 1 +) improved performance, yielding a sensitivity of 82.2% (95% CI 77.0%-86.4%) and a specificity of 75.7% (95% CI 61.6%-85.8%). With this threshold, the positive likelihood ratio improved from 2.3 (95% CI 1.76-3.06) to 3.4 (95% CI 2.0-6.1).

conclusionsIn older adults with suspected UTI, urine dipstick testing demonstrates limited diagnostic performance. Current thresholds yield high sensitivity but poor specificity, which may contribute to unnecessary antimicrobial treatment. Given the high prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria in older adults, a higher threshold of "total of ≥ 2 + " (either LE ≥ 2 + , or nitrite + combined with LE ≥ 1 +) may improve diagnostic accuracy and be considered when assessing patients ≥ 60 years old for antibiotic therapy. Prospective studies are needed to confirm this recommendation.

Indexed as

ConsensusReagent StripsUrinalysisUrinary Tract InfectionsAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityReagent StripsDiagnostic accuracyDiagnostic stewardshipDipstickOlder adultsUrinary Tract Infection

Identifiers

PMID42237236
PMCPMC13459621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.