ReviewBiomolecules2024
Urinary Tract Infections Detection with Molecular Biomarkers.
Review in Biomolecules, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Determinants of Urinary Podocyte Biomarkers and Their Feasibility in Paraprotein-Related Kidney Disease.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Explainable machine learning with routine biomarkers identifies culture-defined bacteremic urosepsis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Neutrophil Percentage-to-Albumin Ratio as a Predictor of Urinary Tract Infection in Patients with Urinary Stone Disease: Development a Novel User-Friendly Tool.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Article
- Procalcitonin for Predicting Sepsis in Infants in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Study.Pediatric health, medicine and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Biomarkers innovation in urinary tract infections: Insights into pathophysiology, antibiotic resistance, and clinical applications.World journal of nephrology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most prevalent kind of pathogenic bacteria infection, and the midstream urine culture is regarded as the gold standard in UTI diagnosis. Recently, even with modern media and techniques such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), urinary cultures still create a considerable workload for hospital laboratories. Other UTI-detecting methods, such as flow cytometry and lateral flow immunoassay, suffer from various drawbacks like long time consumption and low sensitivity. Therefore, looking for reliable biomarkers in UTI is urgently needed. In this review, the current definitions of UTI can be basically divided into two main categories: uncomplicated UTI and complicated UTI. In light of anatomical sites, it can be classified as either lower UTI or upper UTI. We take the classification of UTI as a clue and review the reported extensive literature to classify the existing studied markers into the following three categories: Biomarkers used clinically; Promising biomarkers; and Controversial biomarkers. Particularly, the nucleic acid-associated, metabolomic, and lipidomic biomarkers are highlighted. At the end, we discuss the challenges and prospects of biomarkers in UTI, hoping to further inspire the diagnosis of UTI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.