Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23808472›Full record

ReviewArchives of pathology & laboratory medicine2013

Current landscape and new paradigms of proficiency testing and external quality assessment for molecular genetics.

Lisa V Kalman, Ira M Lubin, Shannon Barker, Desiree du Sart, Rob Elles, Wayne W Grody, Mario Pazzagli, Sue Richards, Iris Schrijver, Barbara Zehnbauer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Molecular Biomarkers for the Evaluation of Colorectal Cancer.American journal of clinical pathology · 2017
    Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

10 authors.

Lisa V KalmanLaboratory Research and Evaluation Branch, Division of Laboratory Science and Standards, Office of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA. LKalman@cdc.gov
Ira M Lubin
Shannon Barker
Desiree du Sart
Rob Elles
Wayne W Grody
Mario Pazzagli
Sue Richards
Iris Schrijver
Barbara Zehnbauer

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextParticipation in proficiency testing (PT) or external quality assessment (EQA) programs allows the assessment and comparison of test performance among different clinical laboratories and technologies. In addition to the approximately 2300 tests for individual genetic disorders, recent advances in technology have enabled the development of clinical tests that quickly and economically analyze the entire human genome. New PT/EQA approaches are needed to ensure the continued quality of these complex tests.

objectivesTo review the availability and scope of PT/EQA for molecular genetic testing for inherited conditions in Europe, Australasia, and the United States; to evaluate the successes and demonstrated value of available PT/EQA programs; and to examine the challenges to the provision of comprehensive PT/EQA posed by new laboratory practices and methodologies. DATA SOURCES: The available literature on this topic was reviewed and supplemented with personal experiences of several PT/EQA providers.

conclusionsProficiency testing/EQA schemes are available for common genetic disorders tested in many clinical laboratories but are not available for most genetic tests offered by only one or a few laboratories. Provision of broad, method-based PT schemes, such as DNA sequencing, would allow assessment of many tests for which formal PT is not currently available. Participation in PT/EQA improves the quality of testing by identifying inaccuracies that laboratories can trace to errors in their testing processes. Areas of research and development to ensure that PT/EQA programs can meet the needs of new and evolving genetic tests and technologies are identified and discussed.

Indexed as

Quality Assurance, Health CareGenetic Diseases, InbornHumansLaboratory Proficiency TestingMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPathology, Molecular

Identifiers

PMID23808472
PMCPMC4684176

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.