Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21839016›Full record

ArticleBlood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue2011

Blood cell counting in neonates: a comparison between a low volume micromethod and the standard laboratory method.

Fabrizio Papa, Mauro Rongioletti, Marco Della Ventura, Francesco Di Turi, Maurizio Cortesi, Patrizio Pasqualetti, Maria Bernardetta Majolini, Valeria Collegiani, Marika Cicchese, Maria Letizia Notarmuzi and 2 more

Abstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. End-tidal capnography monitoring in infants ventilated on the neonatal intensive care unit.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Fabrizio PapaClinical Pathology Unit, San Giovanni Calibita, Fatebenefratelli Hospital, Rome.
Mauro Rongioletti
Marco Della Ventura
Francesco Di Turi
Maurizio Cortesi
Patrizio Pasqualetti
Maria Bernardetta Majolini
Valeria Collegiani
Marika Cicchese
Maria Letizia Notarmuzi
Rocco Agostino
Giancarlo Maria Liumbruno

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIatrogenic anaemia caused by repeated blood sampling to monitor laboratory parameters can contribute, particularly in neonates, to the need for transfusion. "Point of care" laboratory equipment uses smaller amounts of blood for analytic determinations and could, therefore, help to prevent secondary anaemia. In this study we compared the results of haematological parameters measured using a standard laboratory method and using a "point of care" micromethod, with the aim of validating the use of this latter method in clinical practice in neonatology. MATERIALS AND

methodsOne hundred and fifty venous or capillary blood samples were taken from full-term or premature neonates 2-4 hours or 48 hours after birth. Each sample was processed by a standard haematology analyser and another micromethod instrument. Bland-Altman plots were constructed for each parameter and intra-class coefficients of correlation were calculated in order to evaluate the concordance between the two analysers.

resultsThe concordance between the data obtained with the two analysers, expressed as the intra-class correlation, was 0.98 for white blood cell count, 0.97 for haemoglobin concentration, 0.96 for haematocrit, 0.95 for mean red cell volume and 0.98 for platelet count. The micromethod produced overestimated mean values for the leucocyte count (+1.27; p<0.001), haematocrit (+1.80; p<0.001) and platelet count (+13.55; p<0.001).

conclusionsOverall, the concordance between the values obtained with the two analysers was high for each of the parameters taken into consideration. In the case of haemoglobin and leucocytes, give the high intra-class correlation and lack of systematic overestimation of one method over another, the micromethod guarantees a correct evaluation; however, despite the high intra-class correlations for platelet counts, the systemic error seems to suggest that the micromethod cannot guarantee an appropriate evaluation of this parameter.

Indexed as

Blood Cell CountFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMalePoint-of-Care Systems

Identifiers

PMID21839016
PMCPMC3200409

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.