↓ Skip to main content

Urine Flow Cytometry in the Diagnosis of Urinary Tract Infection

Overview of attention for article published in Indian Journal of Pediatrics, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Urine Flow Cytometry in the Diagnosis of Urinary Tract Infection
Published in
Indian Journal of Pediatrics, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s12098-018-2689-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Seçil Conkar, Sevgi Mir

Abstract

To determine the cut-off value of bacteria with urine flow cytometer in diagnosing urinary tract infection. From a total of 546 patients admitted to the hospital with urinary tract infection (UTI), two urine samples were obtained for each patient. Urine samples in sterile containers were divided into two; first for urine culture and second for simultaneous measurement with UF-1000i flow cytometry device. The presence of a single type of bacteria over 103 CFU/mL in urine culture was accepted as UTI. Of 546 patients, 210 (38.5%) were boys and 336 (61.5%) were girls. There was no growth in 489 (89.5%) of the urine specimens and 57 (10.4%) samples showed growth (>103 CFU/ml). A threshold of 10 bacteria/μL in flow cytometry (sensitivity = 100%) showed the best compatibility with culture. Diagnostic values in terms of sensitivity (100%), specificity (43.5%), negative predictive value (100%) and positive predictive value (17.7%) were satisfactory. The UF-1000i flow cytometer can give results quickly and exclude UTI using the determined number of cut-off bacteria at low cost. Thus, if Sysmex UF-1000i is used, quick and accurate results can be obtained and unnecessary laboratory tests can be prevented. Also, patient convenience can be increased.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 5 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 18%
Student > Master 3 14%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 4 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Materials Science 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2021.
All research outputs
#6,877,727
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from Indian Journal of Pediatrics
#248
of 1,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,606
of 326,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Indian Journal of Pediatrics
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,556 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,650 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.