ArticleBiochemia medica2015
Ten years of preanalytical monitoring and control: Synthetic Balanced Score Card Indicator.
Article in Biochemia medica, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Competitive Real-Time Near Infrared (NIR) Vein Finder Imaging Device to Improve Peripheral Subcutaneous Vein Selection in Venipuncture for Clinical Laboratory Testing.Micromachines · 2021Article
- Vein Pattern Locating Technology for Cannulation: A Review of the Low-Cost Vein Finder Prototypes Utilizing near Infrared (NIR) Light to Improve Peripheral Subcutaneous Vein Selection for Phlebotomy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Proposal of a multidimensional strategic-management dashboard for use in a rehabilitation respiratory unit.Medicine · 2019Article
- Errors in the Extra-Analytical Phases of Clinical Chemistry Laboratory Testing.Indian journal of clinical biochemistry : IJCB · 2018Article
- Education and communication is the key for the successful management of vitamin D test requesting.Biochemia medica · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPreanalytical control and monitoring continue to be an important issue for clinical laboratory professionals. The aim of the study was to evaluate a monitoring system of preanalytical errors regarding not suitable samples for analysis, based on different indicators; to compare such indicators in different phlebotomy centres; and finally to evaluate a single synthetic preanalytical indicator that may be included in the balanced scorecard management system (BSC). MATERIALS AND
methodsWe collected individual and global preanalytical errors in haematology, coagulation, chemistry, and urine samples analysis. We also analyzed a synthetic indicator that represents the sum of all types of preanalytical errors, expressed in a sigma level. We studied the evolution of those indicators over time and compared indicator results by way of the comparison of proportions and Chi-square.
resultsThere was a decrease in the number of errors along the years (P<0.001). This pattern was confirmed in primary care patients, inpatients and outpatients. In blood samples, fewer errors occurred in outpatients, followed by inpatients.
conclusionWe present a practical and effective methodology to monitor unsuitable sample preanalytical errors. The synthetic indicator results summarize overall preanalytical sample errors, and can be used as part of BSC management system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.