To determine whether a novel urine collection device (the ‘Pee-in-Pot (PiP)’) produces the same rates of reportable urine culture results as standard of care (SOC) urine collection. To determine whether the PiP produces comparable microscopy results to SOC urine collection. To estimate the carbon footprint of the PiP compared to SOC urine collection.

A prospectively designed, single-centre, paired comparison study.

A district general hospital in Southwest England, including antenatal clinical, accident and emergency, medical and surgical ward environments.

Adults aged 18 or over.

Urine passed through the PiP device before being decanted into a 10 mL boric acid tube for microscopy and culture, compared with the same urine contained only in a sterile plastic vessel before being decanted into a boric acid tube for microscopy and culture.

The proportion of positive urine culture results.

The proportion of heavy mixed growth culture results. Comparison of particle counts: all small particles, bacteria, red blood cells and white blood cells.

Microscopy was performed for 1353 paired samples, of which 808 paired samples both underwent culture. Overall, urine cultures were positive in 9.3% (75/808) and 10.0% (81/808) of PiP and control cases, respectively. Overall matching between PiP and control arms for reportable positive culture results was 98.5% (796/808), with a Cohen’s Kappa test coefficient () of 0.9149 (almost perfect agreement). There was no significant difference in the rate of positive urine culture results between testing arms for any organisms (margin of non-inferiority prospectively defined as ±2.5% for Escherichia coli positive cultures). For microscopy, there was agreement in meeting culture thresholds for 1308 of 1353 paired samples with a difference in culturing rates of 0.00517 (95% CI –0.0045 to 0.015, ie, high level of agreement). The estimated base case carbon footprint of PiP testing was 95g CO2e compared to 270g CO2e for SOC testing.

This study found the PiP to be non-inferior for routine urine microscopy and culture testing and to have a lower carbon footprint compared with SOC urine testing.

Growing evidence points towards the integral role of both central and peripheral inflammation across all neurodegenerative diseases, including dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The immune alterations observed in these diseases may occur long before the onset of clinical and cognitive symptoms; however, the exact timing and role of inflammation in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disease remains unclear. Findings to date are conflicting, with most work focused on AD rather than other dementias and most studies from single sites and cross-sectional. Through longitudinally examining detailed phenotypes of the peripheral immune system using mass cytometry, the Immune Profiling in Early Cognitive Disorders study aims to uncover specific immune signatures in early AD and DLB, how these signatures change over time and how they relate to disease progression and cognitive changes.

Blood, cerebrospinal fluid, saliva and urine samples will be collected from a cohort of participants with either prodromal (mild cognitive impairment) or early dementia due to Lewy bodies or AD (MCI-LB and DLB; and MCI-AD and AD), alongside healthy controls. Through immunophenotyping with mass cytometry, detailed immune fingerprints will be identified for these groups. We will assess which key combinations of immune cell clusters are predictive of disease phenotype, cognitive decline and progression to dementia. Samples will also be evaluated with novel techniques to measure markers of degenerative pathology and inflammation.

This study was approved by the Preston North West Research Ethics committee (21/NW/0314) and is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN62392656). The study is ongoing (since June 2022). Baseline visits are being undertaken, and follow-up visits have started for some participants. Full data analyses will be completed and submitted for publication upon conclusion of the study.

To examine trends in the prevalence of diabetes and pre-diabetes in Indonesia from 2013 to 2023 and to explore demographic and socioeconomic factors associated with these changes.

Secondary data analysis on multiseries cross-sectional study.

Three waves of the Indonesian National Health Survey (2013, 2018 and 2023), each employing nationally representative, stratified multistage sampling.

Nationally representative respondents aged 15 years and older who completed fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT).

Diabetes and pre-diabetes were defined based on FPG and OGTT tests and self-reported diagnosis. Multivariable and ordinal logistic regression models assessed associations between glycaemic status and demographic, socioeconomic and health-related factors.

From 2013 to 2023, the prevalence of diabetes rose from 10.7% (95% CI: 10.2% to 11.2%) in 2013 to 11.8% (11.3% to 12.3%) in 2018, before declining to 11.3% (10.7% to 11.9%) in 2023. Meanwhile, pre-diabetes prevalence decreased from 44.5% (43.6% to 45.3%) in 2013 to 39.2% (38.0% to 40.3%) in 2023. Age-standardised and synthetic cohort analysis revealed that younger birth cohorts had lower diabetes prevalence at the same age compared with older generations. In contrast, diabetes prevalence remained high and stable among older adults, suggesting that an increase in diabetes prevalence was due to the increase in older population size rather than increased risk. Multivariable regression confirms that higher age and BMI were strong predictors for diabetes, pre-diabetes and abnormal glycaemic states. Wealth quintiles showed different associations: higher wealth was linked to lower pre-diabetes odds, but not consistently to diabetes.

The ageing population drives the rise of diabetes prevalence in Indonesia. Generational improvements were shown among younger adults, while persistent high diabetes prevalence in older adults underscores ongoing challenges. These findings highlight the importance of age-targeted and cohort-targeted screening and prevention strategies.