ArticleBiochemia medica2021
The response of total testing process in clinical laboratory medicine to COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Biochemia medica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Pre-Analytical Performance Using IFCC Quality Indicators, Six Sigma Metrics and Root Cause Analysis in a Biochemistry Laboratory-A Retrospective Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Impact of COVID-19 on the pre and post analytical clinical laboratory testing processes- A performance evaluation study using six sigma.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFollowing a pandemic, laboratory medicine is vulnerable to laboratory errors due to the stressful and high workloads. We aimed to examine how laboratory errors may arise from factors, MATERIALS AND
methodsIn 12 months, 6 months before and during the pandemic, laboratory errors were assessed via quality indicators (QIs) related to TTP phases. QIs were grouped as pre-, intra- and postanalytical. The results of QIs were expressed in defect percentages and sigma, evaluated with 3 levels of performance quality: 25
resultsWhen the pre- and during pandemic periods were compared, the sigma value of the samples not received was significantly lower in pre-pandemic group than during pandemic group (4.7σ
conclusionIn all TTP phases, some quality indicators improved while others regressed during the pandemic period. It was observed that preanalytical phase was affected more by the pandemic.
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.