ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2018
Comparison between capillary zone electrophoresis and capillary isoelectric focusing for thalassemia screening in southern China.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison between capillary zone electrophoresis and capillary isoelectric focusing for thalassemia screening in southern China.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCapillary isoelectric focusing is a type of capillary electrophoresis method newly used for thalassemia screening in China. Although the good performance has been proved by several studies, whether it can best suit the special needs of Chinese patients still requires further investigations.
methodsComparisons were made between capillary zone electrophoresis method applied on Sebia Minicap and capillary isoelectric focusing method applied on Helena V8 platform E-class on identifying Hb E, Hb CS, Hb H, and Hb Barts for patients from southern China. And mixing studies were used to evaluate the lowest detection limits of these 2 kinds of capillary electrophoresis system.
resultsHelena V8 could not make a distinction between peaks of Hb E and peaks of Hb A2 as Sebia Minicap did. All chosen patients with Hb H and/or Hb Barts could be screened out by both 2 systems, but when analyzed by Helena V8, it was hard to distinguish Hb H from Hb Barts sometimes, while Sebia Minicap could make a clear distinction between peaks of Hb H and Hb Barts. Only a part of patients (3 of 8, 37.5%) with Hb CS could be screened out by Helena V8, while all patients could be identified by Sebia Minicap. Sebia Minicap had a lower detection limit for trace peaks than Helena V8 (near to 0.2% vs near to 0.6%).
conclusionsCompared with capillary zone electrophoresis, capillary isoelectric focusing applied on Helena V8 maybe is not the first choice for hemoglobinopathy testing in southern China.
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.