Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25210208›Full record

ArticleThe Clinical biochemist. Reviews2014

Laboratory medicine best practice guideline: vitamins a, e and the carotenoids in blood.

Ronda F Greaves, Gerald A Woollard, Kirsten E Hoad, Trevor A Walmsley, Lambro A Johnson, Scott Briscoe, Sabrina Koetsier, Tamantha Harrower, Janice P Gill

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Clinical biochemist. Reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. The Role of Vitamin A in Retinal Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Associations between serum vitamin E concentration and bone mineral density in the US elderly population.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2017
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. 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

9 authors.

Ronda F GreavesAustralasian Association of Clinical Biochemists, Vitamins Working Party; ; School of Medical Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Vic., Australia; ; Centre for Hormone Research, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Vic., Australia;
Gerald A WoollardAustralasian Association of Clinical Biochemists, Vitamins Working Party; ; Department of Specialist Chemical Pathology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand;
Kirsten E HoadAustralasian Association of Clinical Biochemists, Vitamins Working Party; ; Core Clinical Pathology and Biochemistry, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, WA, Australia;
Trevor A WalmsleyAustralasian Association of Clinical Biochemists, Vitamins Working Party; ; Biochemistry Department, Canterbury Health Laboratories, Christchurch, New Zealand;
Lambro A JohnsonAustralasian Association of Clinical Biochemists, Vitamins Working Party; ; Department of Chemical Pathology, Pathology Queensland, Brisbane, Qld, Australia;
Scott BriscoeAustralasian Association of Clinical Biochemists, Vitamins Working Party; ; Department of Chemical Pathology, Pathology Queensland, Brisbane, Qld, Australia;
Sabrina KoetsierAustralasian Association of Clinical Biochemists, Vitamins Working Party; ; RCPAQAP Chemical Pathology, Adelaide, SA, Australia;
Tamantha HarrowerAustralasian Association of Clinical Biochemists, Vitamins Working Party; ; Sullivan and Nicolaides Pathology, Brisbane, Qld, Australia.
Janice P GillAustralasian Association of Clinical Biochemists, Vitamins Working Party; ; RCPAQAP Chemical Pathology, Adelaide, SA, Australia;

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite apparent method similarities between laboratories there appear to be confounding factors inhibiting uniform reporting and standardisation of vitamin assays. The Australasian Association of Clinical Biochemists (AACB) Vitamins Working Party, in conjunction with The Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Programs, has formulated a guideline to improve performance, reproducibility and accuracy of fat-soluble vitamin results. The aim of the guideline is to identify critical pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical components of the analysis of vitamins A, E and carotenoids in blood to promote best practice and harmonisation. This best practice guideline has been developed with reference to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) "Laboratory Medicine Best Practices: Developing an Evidence-Based Review and Evaluation Process". The CDC document cites an evaluation framework for generating best practice recommendations that are specific to laboratory medicine. These 50 recommendations proposed herein, were generated from a comprehensive literature search and the extensive combined experience of the AACB Vitamins Working Party members. They were formulated based on comparison between an impact assessment rating and strength of evidence and were classified as either: (1) strongly recommend, (2) recommend, (3) no recommendation for or against, or (4) recommend against. These best practice recommendations represent the consensus views, in association with peer reviewed evidence of the AACB Vitamins Working Party, towards best practice for the collection, analysis and interpretation of vitamins A, E and carotenoids in blood.

Identifiers

PMID25210208
PMCPMC4159783

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.