Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30167387›Full record

ArticleAfrican journal of laboratory medicine2018

Using laboratory data to categorise CD4 laboratory turn-around-time performance across a national programme.

Lindi-Marie Coetzee, Naseem Cassim, Deborah K Glencross

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in African journal of laboratory medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Lindi-Marie CoetzeeNational Health Laboratory Service, National Priority Programme, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8981-1744
Naseem CassimNational Health Laboratory Service, National Priority Programme, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4389-2849
Deborah K GlencrossNational Health Laboratory Service, National Priority Programme, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7106-769X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveThe National Health Laboratory Service provides CD4 testing through an integrated tiered service delivery model with a target laboratory turn-around time (TAT) of 48 h. Mean TAT provides insight into national CD4 laboratory performance. However, it is not sensitive enough to identify inefficiencies of outlying laboratories or predict the percentage of samples meeting the TAT target. The aim of this study was to describe the use of the median, 75th percentile and percentage within target of laboratory TAT data to categorise laboratory performance.

methodsRetrospective CD4 laboratory data for 2015-2016 fiscal year were extracted from the corporate data warehouse. The laboratory TAT distribution and percentage of samples within the 48 h target were assessed. A scatter plot was used to categorise laboratory performance into four quadrants using both the percentage within target and 75th percentile TAT. The laboratory performance was labelled good, satisfactory or poor.

resultsTAT data reported a positive skew with a mode of 13 h and a median of 17 h and 75th percentile of 25 h. Overall, 93.2% of CD4 samples had a laboratory TAT of less than 48 h. 48 out of 52 laboratories reported good TAT performance, i.e. percentage within target > 85% and 75th percentile ≤ 48 h, with two categorised as satisfactory (one parameter met), and two as poor performing laboratories (failed both parameters).

conclusionThis study demonstrated the feasibility of utilising laboratory data to categorise laboratory performance. Using the quadrant approach for TAT data, laboratories that need interventions can be highlighted for root cause analysis assessment.

Identifiers

PMID30167387
PMCPMC6111574

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.