<> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#comment> "The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license."^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/AcademicArticle> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Article> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/title> "A revalidation and critique of assumptions about urinary sample collection methods, specimen quality and contamination"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/abstract> "INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS\r\nMidstream urine (MSU) is key in assessing lower urinary tract syndrome (LUTS), but contingent on some assumptions. The aim of this study was to compare the occurrence of contamination and the quality of substrates obtained from four different collections: MSU, catheter specimen urine (CSU), a commercial MSU collecting device (Peezy) and a natural void. Contamination was quantified by differential, uroplakin-positive, urothelial cell counts.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nThis was a single blind, crossover study conducted in two phases. First, we compared the MSU with CSU using urine culture, pyuria counts and differential counting of epithelial cells after immunofluorescence staining for uroplakin III (UP3). Second, we compared the three non-invasive (MSU, Peezy MSUâ„¢, natural void) methods using UP3 antibody staining only.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nThe natural void was best at collecting bladder urinary sediment, with the majority of epithelial cells present derived from the urinary tract. CSU sampling missed much of the urinary sediment and showed sparse culture results. Finally, the MSU collection methods did not capture much of the bladder sediment.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nWe found little evidence for contamination with the four methods. Natural void was the best method for harvesting shed urothelial cells and white blood cells. It provides a richer sample of the inflammatory exudate, including parasitised urothelial cells and the microbial substrate. However, if the midstream sample is believed to be important, the MSU collection device is advantageous."^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/date> "2020-03-05" .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/publication/ext-f2d1ee1081c5fe7c32e320a76c2dbc5a> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Collection> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/publication/ext-f2d1ee1081c5fe7c32e320a76c2dbc5a> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "International Urogynecology Journal"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/isPartOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/publication/ext-f2d1ee1081c5fe7c32e320a76c2dbc5a> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/status> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/status/forthcoming> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-88cb56f2a6e93854fad7d0c53fc4eb12> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/authorList> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264#authors> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264#authors> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#_1> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-88cb56f2a6e93854fad7d0c53fc4eb12> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-6ac39298a21e73b587e14f8f51b82355> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/authorList> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264#authors> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264#authors> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#_2> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-6ac39298a21e73b587e14f8f51b82355> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-17df5dda8fc1acbf60821192727348f5> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/authorList> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264#authors> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264#authors> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#_3> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-17df5dda8fc1acbf60821192727348f5> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-93e3d8797660d2cd088da30e43aecfa5> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/authorList> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264#authors> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264#authors> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#_4> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-93e3d8797660d2cd088da30e43aecfa5> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-88cb56f2a6e93854fad7d0c53fc4eb12> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-88cb56f2a6e93854fad7d0c53fc4eb12> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/givenName> "L"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-88cb56f2a6e93854fad7d0c53fc4eb12> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/familyName> "Collins"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-88cb56f2a6e93854fad7d0c53fc4eb12> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "L Collins"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-6ac39298a21e73b587e14f8f51b82355> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-6ac39298a21e73b587e14f8f51b82355> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/givenName> "S"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-6ac39298a21e73b587e14f8f51b82355> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/familyName> "Sathiananthamoorthy"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-6ac39298a21e73b587e14f8f51b82355> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "S Sathiananthamoorthy"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-17df5dda8fc1acbf60821192727348f5> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-17df5dda8fc1acbf60821192727348f5> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/givenName> "J"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-17df5dda8fc1acbf60821192727348f5> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/familyName> "Rohn"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-17df5dda8fc1acbf60821192727348f5> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "J Rohn"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-93e3d8797660d2cd088da30e43aecfa5> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-93e3d8797660d2cd088da30e43aecfa5> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/givenName> "J"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-93e3d8797660d2cd088da30e43aecfa5> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/familyName> "Malone-Lee"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-93e3d8797660d2cd088da30e43aecfa5> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "J Malone-Lee"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/EPrint> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/ArticleEPrint> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/isPartOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/repository> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "A revalidation and critique of assumptions about urinary sample collection methods, specimen quality and contamination (Text)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/hasVersion> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasPublished> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasFile> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/1/Collins2020_Article_ARevalidationAndCritiqueOfAssu.pdf> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/1/Collins2020_Article_ARevalidationAndCritiqueOfAssu.pdf> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/1/Collins2020_Article_ARevalidationAndCritiqueOfAssu.pdf> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "Collins2020_Article_ARevalidationAndCritiqueOfAssu.pdf"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067485> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067485> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067485> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "A revalidation and critique of assumptions about urinary sample collection methods, specimen quality and contamination (Other)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067485> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067485> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067485> <http://eprints.org/relation/islightboxThumbnailVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067485> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasFile> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/2/lightbox.jpg> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067485> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/2/lightbox.jpg> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/2/lightbox.jpg> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "lightbox.jpg"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067486> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067486> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067486> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "A revalidation and critique of assumptions about urinary sample collection methods, specimen quality and contamination (Other)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067486> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067486> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067486> <http://eprints.org/relation/ispreviewThumbnailVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067486> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasFile> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/3/preview.jpg> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067486> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/3/preview.jpg> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/3/preview.jpg> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "preview.jpg"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067487> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067487> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067487> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "A revalidation and critique of assumptions about urinary sample collection methods, specimen quality and contamination (Other)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067487> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067487> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067487> <http://eprints.org/relation/ismediumThumbnailVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067487> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasFile> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/4/medium.jpg> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067487> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/4/medium.jpg> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/4/medium.jpg> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "medium.jpg"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067488> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067488> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067488> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "A revalidation and critique of assumptions about urinary sample collection methods, specimen quality and contamination (Other)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067488> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067488> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067488> <http://eprints.org/relation/issmallThumbnailVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067488> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasFile> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/5/small.jpg> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067488> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/5/small.jpg> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/5/small.jpg> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "small.jpg"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067489> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067489> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067489> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "A revalidation and critique of assumptions about urinary sample collection methods, specimen quality and contamination (Other)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067489> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067489> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067489> <http://eprints.org/relation/isIndexCodesVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067484> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067489> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasFile> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/6/indexcodes.txt> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1067489> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/6/indexcodes.txt> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/6/indexcodes.txt> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "indexcodes.txt"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#seeAlso> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/> <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title> "HTML Summary of #10093264 \n\nA revalidation and critique of assumptions about urinary sample collection methods, specimen quality and contamination\n\n" .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/> <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/format> "text/html" .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264/> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10093264> .