ReviewJournal of medical biochemistry2017
Laboratory Information System - Where are we Today?
Review in Journal of medical biochemistry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deployment of Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Oral Pathology: Evidence Summary and Implementation Gaps.Analytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam) · 2026Review
- Impact of using cross-over CV and mean for two different lots of assay control on implementation of Westgard rules in chemical diagnostic tests.Practical laboratory medicine · 2025Article
- A Situation Analysis of the Capacity of Laboratories in Faith-Based Hospitals in Zambia to Conduct Surveillance of Antimicrobial Resistance: Opportunities to Improve Diagnostic Stewardship.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Assessment of antimicrobial resistance laboratory-based surveillance capacity of hospitals in Zambia: findings and implications for system strengthening.The Journal of hospital infection · 2024Article
- Review
- Impact of the Implementation of Laboratory Information System (WWDISA) on Timely Provision of HIV-1 Viral Load Results in a Rural Area, Inhambane, Mozambique.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Clinical laboratory services for primary healthcare centers in urban cities: a pilot ACO model of ten primary healthcare centers.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- COVID-19 Diagnostic Strategies Part II: Protein-Based Technologies.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Project Management in Laboratory Medicine.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2019Article
- Recent Advancement of Clinical Information Systems: Opportunities and Challenges.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wider implementation of laboratory information systems (LIS) in clinical laboratories in Serbia has been initiated ten years ago. The first LIS in the Railway Health Care Institute has been implemented nine years ago. Before the LIS was initiated, manual admission procedures limited daily output of patients. Moreover, manual entering of patients data and ordering tests on analyzers was problematic and time consuming. After completing tests, laboratory personnel had to write results in patient register (with potential errors) and provide invoices for health insurance organisation. First LIS brought forward some advantages with regards to these obstacles, but it also showed various weaknesses. These can be summarised in rigidity of system and inability to fulfil user expectation. After 4 years of use, we replaced this system with another LIS. Hence, the main aim of this paper is to evaluate advant ages of using LIS in laboratory of the Railway Health Care Institute and also to discuss further possibilities for its application. After implementing LIS, admission procedure has proven to be much faster. LIS enabled electronic requests, barcoded specimens prevent identification errors, bidirectional interface replaces redundant data entry steps, QC data are transferred automatically, results are electronically validated and automatically archived in data base, billing information is transferred electronically, and more. We also use some advanced options, like delta check, HIL feature, quality indicators and various types of reports. All steps in total testing process are drastically improved after the implementation of LIS, which had a positive impact on the quality of issued laboratory results. However, we expect development of some new features in the future, for example auto-verification and inventory management. On the example of the laboratory of the Railway Health Care Institute, we show that it is crucial that laboratory specialists have the main role in defining desirable characteristics of LIS which institution aims to buy. This paper suggests that the main feature of LIS should be the flexibility of system and capability of adjustment to user needs and requests.
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.