ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Epidemiological profile and antimicrobial resistance of urinary tract infections in diabetic versus non-diabetic individuals.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are a major public health issue, particularly for individuals diabetes, and are further complicated by antibiotic resistance. This study compared the profile and antibiotic susceptibility of uropathogens in 120 diabetic and 130 non-diabetic patients. UTIs were confirmed by microbiological analysis based on standardized bacterial counts and on white blood cell counts. The results showed a significantly higher UTI frequency in diabetic patients (43.33%) versus non-diabetics (28.46%) (Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.98; p = 0.020). No association among 18–45 year olds, however significantly association among those ≥ 46 year olds (OR = 2.33; p = 0.009). Females in both groups have higher risk, which was statistically significant only among diabetics. Type 2 diabetics have a significantly higher UTI rate (48.86%) than type 1 diabetics (28.12%). Clinical symptoms like fever, burning micturition, and hematuria were more frequent in the diabetic group. Eschirichia coli was the most common pathogen in both groups, followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae. Overall, 86.66% of isolates were resistant to at least one antibiotic, with ignificantly higher resistance in diabetics (92.5%) than non-diabetics (75%). Eschericia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterococcus spp. and Staphylococcus aureus exhibited the highest rates of resistance across both groups (exceeded 85%), though resistance to Imipenem, Ceftriaxone, and Nalidixic acid remained below 20%. While resistance was higher across all isolates from diabetic patients, the difference was only statistically significant for E. coli. The study concludes that the higher UTI frequency in diabetics drives increased antibiotic use, which in turn promotes the emergence and spread of resistant bacteria, making treatment increasingly challenging.
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.