ArticleHealth science reports2020
Comparison between optical microscopy and the Sysmex XN-3000 for schistocyte determination in patients suspected of having schistocytosis.
Article in Health science reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of Automated Fragmented Red Cell Count by the Sysmex XN-9000: Correlation With Microscopy and Impact of Microcytosis/Hypochromia.International journal of laboratory hematology · 2026Article
- Common Hematologic Emergencies-Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia and Microangiopathic Hemolytic Anemias-A Pivotal Role of Clinical Laboratory.International journal of laboratory hematology · 2026Review
- Low ADAMTS13 Activity Correlates with Increased Mortality in COVID-19 Patients.TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis · 2021Article
- Comparison between optical microscopy and the Sysmex XN-3000 for schistocyte determination in patients suspected of having schistocytosis.Health science reports · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsDiagnosis of thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) relies on microscopic schistocyte determination by an experienced microscopist. In addition, schistocytes can be found in non-TMA-related disorders such as thalassaemia. We aimed to compare the accuracy of the automated haematology analyser Sysmex XN-3000 for schistocyte detection, to that of the microscopy approach, in patients suspected of having schistocytosis.
methodsConsecutive blood samples were collected between April 2016 and March 2017 at Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. Specimens were collected from adults with suspected TMA or with thalassaemia trait and/or disease. All blood samples were examined by both microscopy and the analyser. Samples were considered to be positive for schistocytes (ie, schistocytosis) if they had a schistocyte count ≥1% by microscopy. The analyser's ability to determine schistocytosis was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of an appropriate cut-off point were calculated, with manual microscopy as the standard. Quantitative agreement in schistocyte counts between the two approaches was assessed using 95% limits of agreement, Bland-Altman plots, intraclass correlation coefficient, and concordance correlation coefficient.
resultsNinety-seven blood samples (62 suspected TMA and 35 thalassaemia) were collected. ROC curve analysis of the analyser for determining schistocytosis showed an area under the curve of 0.803 (95% confidence interval, 0.689-0.917,
conclusionSysmex XN-3000 can be used for qualitative measurement of schistocytosis, but should not be used as a quantitative tool for schistocyte counting. Improvements are needed before this analyser's schistocyte detection feature can be recommended for use in clinical practice.
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.