{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015184381778741865, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005422993492407809, 'mean_word_length': 5.36551724137931, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of three methods for analysis of urinary sediments.

Efficiency of urine sediment analysis was evaluated in 423 specimens including 86 documented renal disorder ones using three methods; a traditional centrifugal and microscopic one, an image-scanning one and a flow cytometric one. Among the three methods, good correlations were observed in white blood cells and epithelial cells. Between white blood cells and bacterial counts a good correlation was observed only in the flow cytometry one. Female specimens usually demonstrated high values in white blood cells except with the microscopic method. Casts in patients with renal disorder exhibited significantly high in the flow cytometric method. In all methods, proteinuria specimens showed high cast count in the sediment. From these results we concluded that the flow cytometric method was clinically useful, especially in urinary tract disorder specimens.