Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34105993›Full record

ReviewClinical microbiology reviews2021

Clinical Laboratory Biosafety Gaps: Lessons Learned from Past Outbreaks Reveal a Path to a Safer Future.

Nancy E Cornish, Nancy L Anderson, Diego G Arambula, Matthew J Arduino, Andrew Bryan, Nancy C Burton, Bin Chen, Beverly A Dickson, Judith G Giri, Natasha K Griffith and 8 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical microbiology reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Surveillance of laboratory exposures to human pathogens and toxins, Canada, 2023.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Capsule-based colorimetric temperature monitoring system for customizable cold chain management.Chemical engineering journal (Lausanne, Switzerland : 1996) · 2023
    Article
  18. 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

18 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Nancy E CornishCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services (CSELS), Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Nancy L AndersonCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services (CSELS), Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Diego G ArambulaCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services (CSELS), Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Matthew J ArduinoCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Emerging & Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Andrew BryanDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Nancy C BurtonCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Bin ChenCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services (CSELS), Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Beverly A DicksonDepartment of Clinical Pathology, Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Judith G GiriCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Global Health (CGH), Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Natasha K GriffithHigh Containment Core, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Michael A PentellaCollege of Public Health, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Reynolds M SalernoCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services (CSELS), Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Paramjit SandhuCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services (CSELS), Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
James W SnyderDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA.
Christopher A TormeyDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Elizabeth A WagarDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Elizabeth G WeirichCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services (CSELS), Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Sheldon CampbellDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · USYale University · USGeorgia State University · USTexas Health Dallas · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of Iowa · USUniversity of Louisville · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient care and public health require timely, reliable laboratory testing. However, clinical laboratory professionals rarely know whether patient specimens contain infectious agents, making ensuring biosafety while performing testing procedures challenging. The importance of biosafety in clinical laboratories was highlighted during the 2014 Ebola outbreak, where concerns about biosafety resulted in delayed diagnoses and contributed to patient deaths. This review is a collaboration between subject matter experts from large and small laboratories and the federal government to evaluate the capability of clinical laboratories to manage biosafety risks and safely test patient specimens. We discuss the complexity of clinical laboratories, including anatomic pathology, and describe how applying current biosafety guidance may be difficult as these guidelines, largely based on practices in research laboratories, do not always correspond to the unique clinical laboratory environments and their specialized equipment and processes. We retrospectively describe the biosafety gaps and opportunities for improvement in the areas of risk assessment and management; automated and manual laboratory disciplines; specimen collection, processing, and storage; test utilization; equipment and instrumentation safety; disinfection practices; personal protective equipment; waste management; laboratory personnel training and competency assessment; accreditation processes; and ethical guidance. Also addressed are the unique biosafety challenges successfully handled by a Texas community hospital clinical laboratory that performed testing for patients with Ebola without a formal biocontainment unit. The gaps in knowledge and practices identified in previous and ongoing outbreaks demonstrate the need for collaborative, comprehensive solutions to improve clinical laboratory biosafety and to better combat future emerging infectious disease outbreaks.

Indexed as

Clinical Laboratory ServicesContainment of BiohazardsDisease OutbreaksHumansLaboratoriesRetrospective Studiesbiosafetyclinical laboratoriesdisinfectionethicslaboratory equipmentlaboratory testingpersonal protective equipmentrisk assessmentspecimen collection and transportwaste management

Identifiers

PMID34105993
PMCPMC8262806
OpenAlexW3167924385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.