ArticlePloS one2026
Multicenter evaluation of BACT-Info. and an infection algorithm using Urine Flow Cytometry among clinically diagnosed UTI patients in Indonesia.
Article in PloS one, 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
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are the most common infections in both outpatient and inpatient settings, contributing significantly to morbidity, reduced quality of life, and antimicrobial overuse. Although urine culture remains the diagnostic gold standard, it poses practical limitations in clinical workflows. Rapid diagnostic methods such as urine flow cytometry (UF) offer potential for timely, reliable UTI detection. We conducted a multicenter diagnostic study to evaluate the performance of BACT-Info. and UTI-Info. flags on the UF-5000/4000 system in detecting UTIs, using presumptive Gram staining and urine culture (≥10⁵ CFU/mL) as references. A total of 763 patients with suspected UTI were enrolled, and 721 patients-with uropathogenic bacteria and complete data-were included in the final analysis (384 with culture-confirmed UTI and 337 without UTI). The diagnostic value of nitrituria was highly specific, while leukocyte esterase was sensitive. For BACT-count and WBC-count of UF-5000/4000, the AUCs were 0.85 and 0.69, respectively. Using cutoffs of WBC > 82.05/µL or bacteria >975.4/µL, the UTI-Info flag demonstrated 89% sensitivity, 54% specificity, 69% positive predictive value, and 82% negative predictive value. Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 1.93 and 0.20, respectively. The agreement between the BACT-Info. flag and Gram typing showed Kappa values of 0.716 for Gram-negative and 0.216 for Gram-positive bacteria when compared to culture, and 0.721 and 0.401, respectively, when compared to presumptive Gram staining. The UF-5000/4000 UTI-Info. and BACT-Info. flags show promise as a rapid UTI screening tool. The combination of these flags with urinalysis parameters, nitrite testing and leukocyte has potential to be developed into a diagnostic algorithm for early and sensitive UTI prediction. Such an approach may reduce unnecessary urine cultures and support timely, appropriate empiric antibiotic therapy. Establishing optimal cutoffs tailored to specific clinical settings is essential to enhance diagnostic accuracy and improve clinical utility.
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.