Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27534625›Full record

ReviewThe American journal of clinical nutrition2016

Current practices and challenges in the standardization and harmonization of clinical laboratory tests.

Hubert W Vesper, Gary L Myers, W Greg Miller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

3 authors.

Hubert W VesperDivision of Laboratory Sciences, National Center for Environmental Health, CDC, Atlanta, GA; hvesper@cdc.gov.
Gary L MyersAmerican Association for Clinical Chemistry, Washington, DC; and.
W Greg MillerVirginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective patient care, clinical research, and public health efforts require comparability of laboratory results independent of time, place, and measurement procedure. Comparability is achieved by establishing metrological traceability, which ensures that measurement procedures measure the same quantity and that the calibration of measurement procedures is traceable to a common reference system consisting of reference methods and materials. Whereas standardization ensures traceability to the International System of Units, harmonization ensures traceability to a reference system agreed on by convention. This article provides an overview of standardization and harmonization with an emphasis on commutability as an important variable that affects testing accuracy. Commutability of reference materials is required to ensure that traceability is established appropriately and that laboratory results are comparable. The use of noncommutable reference materials leads to inaccurate results. Whereas procedures and protocols for standardizing measurements are established and have been successfully applied in efforts such as the Hormones Standardization Program of the CDC, harmonization activities require new, more complex procedures and approaches. The American Association for Clinical Chemistry, together with its domestic and international partners, formed the International Consortium for Harmonization of Clinical Laboratory Results to coordinate harmonization efforts. Reference systems, as well as procedures and protocols to establish traceability of clinical laboratory tests, have been established and continue to be developed by national and international groups and organizations. Serum tests of thyroid function, including those for the thyroid hormones thyroxine and triiodothyronine, are among the clinical procedures for which standardization efforts are well under way. Approaches to the harmonization of measurement procedures for serum concentrations of thyroid-stimulating hormone are likewise under development.

Indexed as

Reference StandardsCalibrationClinical Laboratory TechniquesHumansInternational CooperationIodineLaboratoriesReference ValuesThyroid GlandThyrotropinThyroxineTriiodothyronineIodineThyrotropinThyroxineTriiodothyronineclinical laboratory testsharmonizationiodine statusstandardizationthyroid function tests

Identifiers

PMID27534625
PMCPMC5004491

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.