ArticleBiochemia medica2019
Faecal calprotectin determination: impact of preanalytical sample treatment and stool consistency on within- and between-method variability.
Article in Biochemia medica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Calprest ELISA vs. LiaisonBiomedicines · 2026Article
- Faecal calprotectin reference ranges in early childhood: a cross-sectional study of healthy infants in Hungary.BMJ paediatrics open · 2025Article
- Faecal calprotectin in primary care: is its current use supported by the evidence?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Review
- Changes in S100A8/A9 and S100A12 and Their Comparison with Other Analytes in the Saliva of Pigs with Diarrhea Due toAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Verification of the Bühlmann fCAL turbo faecal calprotectin assay on the Binding Site Optilite benchtop analyser.Practical laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Measurement of Calprotectin (S100A8/A9) in the Saliva of Pigs: Validation Data of A Commercially Available Automated Assay and Changes in Sepsis, Inflammation, and Stress.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Experimental infectious challenge in pigs leads to elevated fecal calprotectin levels following colitis, but not enteritis.Porcine health management · 2021Article
- The comparison of the three assays for determination of fecal calprotectin in inflammatory bowel disease.Biochemia medica · 2021Article
- International consensus on methodological issues in standardization of fecal calprotectin measurement in inflammatory bowel diseases.United European gastroenterology journal · 2021Article
- Expert recommendations regarding the use of fecal calprotectin in daily clinical practice: statements of a taskforce process from the Hellenic Group for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (EOMIFNE).Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe assessed the differences in faecal calprotectin (FC) concentrations measured by two assays depending on the stool consistency and extraction method. MATERIALS AND
methodsStool samples were extracted using the EliA Stool Extraction Kit, Calex® Cap extraction device and respective weighing methods, while FC concentrations were measured using the EliA
resultsResults determined from Calex® Cap extracts were higher compared to weighing method extracts (mean bias 33.3%; P < 0.001), while no significant difference was found between results obtained with EliA Stool Extraction Kit and weighing method (mean bias 0.1%; P = 0.484), in both cases irrespective of stool consistency. Bühlmann fCAL® Turbo results were higher than EliA
conclusionPreanalytical stool sample handling proved to be a crucial factor contributing to within- and between-FC assay variability. Standardization is urgently needed in order to assure comparable and reliable FC results.
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.