ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2020
Comparison of test performance of biochemical parameters in semiautomatic method and fully automatic analyzer method.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 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.
- Rictor/mTORC2 signaling pathway mediates Benzo[a]pyrene-induced renal injury.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Dietary Intake of Polyphenols Enhances Executive/Attentional Functioning and Memory with an Improvement of the Milk Lipid Profile of Postpartum Women from Argentina.Journal of Intelligence · 2022Article
- Role of Oxidative Stress and the Identification of Biomarkers Associated With Thyroid Dysfunction in Schizophrenics.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Efficacy of nonsurgical periodontal therapy affecting salivary biomarkers in non-diabetic and type 2 diabetic periodontitis patients. An observational study.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
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
backgroundThe primary health-care center (PHC) and community health center (CHC) are not well equipped with laboratory services. Semiauto analyzer-based reporting could be an effective modality, provided that the performance standard is comparable to that of the fully automatic analyzer. So, the objective of this study was to analyze the test results of biochemical parameters in semiauto and fully automatic analyzer and to compare the quality performance. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne hundred forty-nine patients undergoing routine biochemical investigations in the department laboratory were enrolled in this study. Two millimeter of venous blood was collected from all the participants and processed for urea, cholesterol, triglyceride (TG), serum glutamate-oxaloacetate transaminase (SGOT) (aspartate aminotransferase), and serum glutamate-pyruvate transaminase (SGPT) (alanine aminotransferase) by using standard kits (ERBA) in semiauto analyzer (Transasia Erba Chem5X by Calbiotech Inc. USA, semiautomated clinical chemistry analyzer) and the fully automatic analyzer (Cobas Integra 400 Roche, Germany) method.
resultsThere was high variability in the distribution of urea, TG, SGOT, and SGPT values in both measurement methods, whereas cholesterol data followed a normal distribution (skewness: 1.522, 1.037; kurtosis: 2.373, 0.693 in semiauto and automated methods, respectively). A significant positive correlation between both the methods of assessment was observed in urea, cholesterol, TGs, SGOT, and SGPT. The mean difference for urea was -9.85 ± 23.997 (LOA: 37.189, -56.88), whereas it was highest for TG -24.34 ± 38.513 (LOA: 51.144, -99.829), suggesting that both methods can measure urea with less difference in absolute values, whereas for TG the measurement values are highly variable.
conclusionThe test performance of biochemical parameters such as urea, total cholesterol, TGs, SGOT, and SGPT taken by semiauto analyzer and fully automatic analyzer method of assessment were highly related and comparable.
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.