SynthesisWorld journal of urology2026
Molecular based diagnostic testing for urinary tract infections: the results remain unclear.
Synthesis in World journal of urology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRecent advances have led to a rise in metagenomic and molecular-based testing for more rapid diagnosis of urinary tract infections (UTI). We conducted a contemporary systematic review to understand how these molecular tests affect clinical outcomes.
methodsA systematic review was conducted for articles in adults from January 2023 to October 2025 as an update to previous scoping reviews. Cochrane and PRISMA standards were utilized with the following databases: PubMed, OVID, and Embase (PROSPERO number: CRD420251070022). Data was extracted from the selected full-text papers including the type of study (microbiology versus clinical), patient demographics, key findings, and funding source. Excluded studies were abstracts, non-English manuscripts, and those involving only men or children.
resultsThe search resulted in 12 full-text articles. Among those, 7 were published in clinical-based journals and 5 were in Microbiology. Two clinical studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which included a total of 773 patients, mostly female and above the age of 65. Compared to a standard urine culture, molecular based testing, specifically with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing yielded superior sensitivity despite lack of specificity and guided antibiotic therapy to reduce UTI baseline symptomatology in the short term (i.e. 28 days) in both RCT analyses. Of note, the RCT analyses and several of the prospective studies (5/10) were funded by the companies that developed the molecular tests.
conclusionsBased on the increase in publications over the last three years, new industry-funded RCTs, and the limited clinical outcome data reported, this systematic review indicates the urgent need for prospective and multicentric studies to better understand the role of these molecular tests in UTI 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.