Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26110032›Full record

Trial reportBiochemia medica2015

Method evaluation study of a new generation of vitamin D assays.

Dietmar Enko, Gernot Kriegshäuser, Robert Stolba, Elfriede Worf, Gabriele Halwachs-Baumann

Open access · diamondAbstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Biochemia medica, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Label-Free Metal-Oxide Transistor Biosensors for Metabolite Detection in Human Saliva.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  7. Rapid Determination of Vitamin DNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. The Effect of Vitamin DNutrients · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dietmar EnkoInstitute of Laboratory Medicine, General Hospital Steyr, Steyr, Austria.
Gernot KriegshäuserInstitute of Laboratory Medicine, General Hospital Steyr, Steyr, Austria.
Robert StolbaInstitute of Laboratory Medicine, General Hospital Steyr, Steyr, Austria.
Elfriede WorfInstitute of Laboratory Medicine, General Hospital Steyr, Steyr, Austria.
Gabriele Halwachs-BaumannInstitute of Laboratory Medicine, General Hospital Steyr, Steyr, Austria.
Engineering Software Steyr (Austria) · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRecently several diagnostic manufacturers have launched new 25-hydroxy-vitamin D (25[OH]D) assays, which are aligned to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Standard Reference Materials (SRM) (NIST, Gaithersburg, Maryland). The aim of this study was to compare the performance of one liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method, one enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and one recalibrated and previous version of a chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA). MATERIAL AND

methodsSerum-aliquots of 198 patient samples from routine 25(OH)D analysis were measured by the ClinMass® LC-MS/MS Complete Kit (RECIPE Chemicals+Instruments GmbH, Munich, Germany), the ORGENTEC 25(OH)D3/D2 ELISA (ORGENTEC Diagnostika GmbH, Mainz, Germany), the recalibrated Immunodiagnostic Systems (IDS)-iSYS 25(OH)DS and the previous used IDS-iSYS 25(OH)D CLIA (Immunodiagnostic Systems Ltd, Boldon, United Kingdom). Bland-Altman and Deming regression analyses were calculated for methods comparison of all tested 25(OH)D assays. The LC-MS/MS method was defined as the reference method. Within-run and between-run precision measurements were performed for all methods with three different concentration levels.

resultsCompared to the LC-MS/MS method, the new IDS-iSYS 25(OH)DS and ORGENTEC 25(OH)D3/D2 assay demonstrated mean relative biases of 16.3% and 17.8%. The IDS-iSYS 25(OH)D assay showed the lowest mean bias of 1.5%. Deming regression analyses of the recalibrated IDS-iSYS 25(OH)DS and the ORGENTEC 25(OH)D3/D2 assay showed proportional differences, when compared to the reference method. All assays showed a within-run and between-run imprecision of ≤20% at each of the evaluated concentration levels.

conclusionsThe evaluated standardized immunoassays and LC-MS/MS are useful methods for measuring 25(OH)D serum-levels in clinical laboratories.

Indexed as

Chromatography, LiquidFemaleHumansMaleMass SpectrometryReference StandardsVitamin D25-hydroxyvitamin DVitamin Dimmunoassaysliquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometryquality improvementreference standardsvitamin D

Identifiers

PMID26110032
PMCPMC4470105
OpenAlexW1179258730

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.