ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2019
Design and evaluation of a LIS-based autoverification system for coagulation assays in a core clinical laboratory.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Establishment of an intelligent auto-verification system for infectious serological markers in a clinical laboratory from West China.Medicine · 2026Article
- Establishment and application of a preset dilution factor strategy for human chorionic gonadotropin testing in clinical laboratory.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2025Article
- Establishment and application of autoverification system for HbA1c testing.Biochemia medica · 2024Article
- Benefit analysis of the auto-verification system of intelligent inspection for microorganisms.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Automation in the Thrombosis and Hemostasis Laboratory.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Designing and validating an autoverification system of biochemical test results in Hatay Mustafa Kemal University, clinical laboratory.Biochemia medica · 2022Article
- Error evaluation in the laboratory testing process and laboratory information systems.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2022Article
- Customized middleware experience in a tertiary care hospital hematology laboratory.Journal of pathology informatics · 2022Article
- Development and implementation of an LIS-based validation system for autoverification toward zero defects in the automated reporting of laboratory test results.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- Use of Middleware Data to Dissect and Optimize Hematology Autoverification.Journal of pathology informatics · 2021Article
- Chronometric vs. Structural Hypercoagulability.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Article
- General position of Croatian medical biochemistry laboratories on autovalidation: survey of the Working Group for Post-analytics of the Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine.Biochemia medica · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe autoverification system for coagulation consists of a series of rules that allow normal data to be released without manual verification. With new advances in medical informatics, the laboratory information system (LIS) has growing potential for the autoverification, allowing rapid and accurate verification of clinical laboratory tests. The purpose of the study is to develop and evaluate a LIS-based autoverification system for validation and efficiency.
methodsAutoverification decision rules, including quality control, analytical error flag, critical value, limited range check, delta check and logical check, as well as patient's historical information, were integrated into the LIS. Autoverification limited range was constructed based on 5 and 95% percentiles. The four most commonly used coagulation assays, prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), thrombin time (TT), and fibrinogen (FBG), were followed by the autoverification protocols. The validation was assessed by the autoverification passing rate, the true-positive cases, the true-negative cases, the false-positive cases, the false-negative cases, the sensitivity and the specificity; the efficiency was evaluated in the turnaround time (TAT).
resultsA total of 157,079 historical test results of coagulation profiles from January 2016 to December 2016 were collected to determine the distribution intervals. The autoverification passing rate was 77.11% (29,165/37,821) based on historical patient data. In the initial test of the autoverification version in June 2017, the overall autoverification passing rate for the whole sample was 78.75% (11,257/14,295), with 892 true-positive cases, 11,257 true-negative cases, 2146 false-positive cases, no false-negative cases, sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 83.99%. After formal implementation of the autoverification system for 6 months, 83,699 samples were assessed. The average overall autoverification passing rate for the whole sample was 78.86% and the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the passing rate was [78.25, 79.59%]. TAT was reduced from 126 min to 101 min, which was statistically significant (P < 0.001, Mann-Whitney U test).
conclusionsThe autoverification system for coagulation assays based on LIS can halt the samples with abnormal values for manual verification, guarantee medical safety, minimize the requirements for manual work, shorten TAT and raise working efficiency.
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.