Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20111077›Full record

ArticleAsian journal of andrology2010

Quality assurance and quality control in the laboratory andrology.

Allan A Pacey

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Asian journal of andrology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Re-evaluation of the value of sperm morphology in classicalThe Journal of international medical research · 2019
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Allan A Paceythe University of Sheffield, UK. A.Pacey@Sheffield.ac.uk

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) are fundamental aspects of any laboratory measurement. However, in comparison with other medical disciplines, the need for QA and QC in laboratory andrology has been recognized only recently. Furthermore, there is evidence that the effort required to undertake QA and QC has not been wholly welcomed by some clinicians. Nevertheless, accrediting bodies and regulatory authorities increasingly require evidence that laboratories have effective QA and QC measures in place because both are central to the quality management processes. Following the publication of the 5th edition of the World Health Organization Laboratory Manual, existing QA and QC systems will need to be updated to take into account some of the methodological changes recommended by the manual. Three of these are discussed in this commentary; they relate to: (i) the move to infer semen volume from its weight; (ii) the re-classification of sperm motility grades from four to three; and (iii) the publication of a lower reference limit for morphology of 4% (with a corresponding 95% confidence interval of 3%-4%). The importance of QA and QC in all laboratory tests, including up and coming new tests to assess sperm DNA integrity, is discussed. The need for adequate initial training and continuing professional development programmes to support laboratory scientists performing andrology is also described.

Indexed as

Quality ControlAndrologyHumansMaleManuals as TopicQuality Assurance, Health CareSemen AnalysisSpermatozoaSperm CountSperm MotilityWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID20111077
PMCPMC3739672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.