ReviewPractical laboratory medicine2020
An overview of the potential sources of diagnostic errors in (classic) thromboelastography curve interpretation and preventive measures.
Review in Practical laboratory medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Cohort, Semi-Randomized, open label quality improvement patient blood management (PBM) comparison of point of care viscoelastic coagulation monitors in cardiac surgery.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Trial
- Comparison of Different Sampling Methods on Viscoelastic Test Results Using a Point-of-Care Coagulation Monitor in Healthy Dogs.Veterinary clinical pathology · 2025Article
- Thromboelastography in Long-Term Antiplatelet Therapy for Patients Diagnosed with Benign Prostate Hyperplasia Undergoing Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: A Retrospective Study.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2024Article
- Kaolin activation of recalcified citrated whole blood in a point-of-care viscoelastic coagulation test.Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire · 2022Article
- Application of thromboelastography in diagnosing normal pregnancies and pregnancies with complications.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Thromboelastography (TEG), a hemostatic point-of-care assay, provides global information about fibrin formation, platelet activation, and clot retraction in real-time. As it is an operator-dependent technique, error in any phase of the testing process can result in the misinterpretation of the thromboelastogram, and subsequently lead to mismanagement of the patient, wastage of blood products besides increasing the financial burden on the hospital and the patient. The present paper describes the possible errors leading to wrong thromboelastogram interpretation, and the respective preventive measure. In the light of limited resources available for operational challenges in TEG, this review paper can prove to be helpful.
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.