Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31582994›Full record

ReviewIranian journal of pathology2019

Secondary Use of Laboratory Data: Potentialities and Limitations.

Massoud Hajia

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Iranian journal of pathology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

1 author.

Massoud HajiaResearch Center of Reference Laboratories, Health Reference Laboratory of Iran, Ministry of Health and Medical Education, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical databases have been developed in recent years especially during the course of all medical concerns including laboratory results. The information produced by the diagnostic laboratories have great impact on health care system with various secondary uses. These uses are sometimes as publishing new extracted information of laboratory reports which have been widely applied in the scientific journals. Nowadays, some large scale or national databases are also formed from the integration of these data from smaller centers in the field of human health in many countries. These databases are beneficial for different stakeholders who may need this information. Unfortunately, reviewing some of these uses has indicated lots of errors in quality control, test validity, uniformity and so on. More importantly, some of the diagnostic procedures have been applied in the clinical diagnostic laboratories without even preliminary clinical evaluation studies. Therefore, any taken conclusion from these analyzed data may not be reliable. This use requires checking the several specifications that have been notified in this study. Current review also intends to show how the correct information should be to extract for the scientific reports, or integrated in large scale databases.

Indexed as

Data integrationLaboratory dataScientific report

Identifiers

PMID31582994
PMCPMC6742739

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.