A Lipidomics-Based Method to Eliminate Negative Urine Culture in General Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Urinary tract infections (UTIs) pose a significant challenge to human health. Accurate and timely detection remains pivotal for effective intervention. Current urine culture techniques, while essential, often encounter challenges where urinalysis yields positive results, but subsequent culture testing produces a negative result. This highlights potential discrepancies between the two methods and emphasizes the need for improved correlation in urinary tract infection (UTI) detection. Employing advanced lipidomics techniques, we deployed the fast lipid analysis technique (FLAT) on a clinical cohort suspected of having UTIs. Lipid fingerprinting by MALDI-TOF MS, directly from urine samples without ex vivo growth, correctly identified the common uropathogens within a 1-hour timeframe when compared to urine culture. FLAT analysis also identified urine samples without culturable pathogens (negative UTIs) with 99% agreement, whereas urinalysis showed 37% agreement with the gold standard urine culture. In 402 urine samples suspected for UTI from out-patients, FLAT assay rapidly ruled out negative urines without the need for culture in 77% of all cases. The potential impact of this innovative lipidomic-based approach extends beyond conventional diagnostic limitations, offering new avenues for early detection and targeted management of urinary tract infections. This research marks a paradigm shift in urine culture methodology, paving the way for improved clinical outcomes and public health interventions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".