Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32481320›Full record

ArticleMedicine2020

The application of quality control circle to improve the quality of samples: A SQUIRE-compliant quality-improving study.

Kangsheng Liu, Zhirong Xu, Xiangdong Wang, Yajun Chen, Xiao-Dong Mao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Quality Control Circle Practices to Reduce Specimen Rejection Rates.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Kangsheng LiuDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Women's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital, Nanjing.
Zhirong XuDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, the First affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou.
Xiangdong WangDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Nanjing Chest Hospital, Medical School of Southeast university.
Yajun ChenDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Women's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital, Nanjing.
Xiao-Dong MaoDepartment of Endocrinology, Affiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since its application in medical institutions in China, quality control circle (QCC) has gained achievements in medical care and thus earned more attention from the administrative department of health.In order to improve the quality of laboratory specimens, we launched a QCC activity to solve the problems and evaluate the effect of it. The data of 30,105 unqualified specimens in our hospital were collected from February to June 2017. After the QCC activity, the data of 43,125 specimens taken from July to December 2017 were collected.The defect rate of the specimens before the QCC activity was 0.98% (297/30105), and after the QCC activity, it was 0.45% (193/43125), showing a significant statistical difference (P < .05). The achievement rate and improvement rate were 108.2% and 54.1%, respectively.After the implementation of QCC, the defect rate of specimens in clinical laboratories was significantly decreased, and the intangible factors were also improved, which demonstrated the positive effects of QCC on the quality control of specimens.

Indexed as

Qualitative ResearchQuality ControlChinaClinical Laboratory TechniquesFollow-Up StudiesHospitalsHumansQuality ImprovementRetrospective StudiesSpecimen Handling

Identifiers

PMID32481320
PMCPMC7249848

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.