ArticleBiochemia medica2020
Survey on request form content and result reporting in therapeutic drug monitoring service among laboratories in Czechia and Slovakia.
Article in Biochemia medica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cystatin C for gentamicin dosing - a case study.Biochemia medica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of the study was to investigate current practice and policies of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) service requesting and result reporting in Czechia and Slovakia. MATERIALS AND
methodsAll 149 laboratories that measure plasma drug concentrations were given an online questionnaire during a regular external quality assessment TDM cycle. The questionnaire consisted of 17 questions. The optimal TDM practice was defined as the application of all elements (age, body weight, time of sampling, date of the first administration, time of the last dose administration, the dose, the dosing interval, the route of administration, information on reason of testing, and information on other co-administered drugs) needed for reporting a recommendation for further drug dosing (positive response to question number 16).
resultsThe response rate was 69%, 103 out of 149 laboratories measuring drug concentrations. Only 12% (12 out of 103 laboratories) of the laboratories implemented all elements needed for optimal TDM practice and reported a recommendation. Both paper and electronic request forms were used by 77 out of 103 (75%) laboratories. A total of 69 out of 103 laboratories (67%) specified the type of sampling tube on their request form. Cystatin C was used for prediction of renal drug elimination by 24% (25 out of 103) of participants.
conclusionsSmall number of laboratories implemented all elements needed for optimal TDM practice and report a recommendation on further dosing. Further efforts in education on optimal TDM practice as well as harmonization of service are desirable.
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.