ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2021
Comparative study of two immunoassays used for the determination of serum vitamin D.
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 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.
- The Quantification of Vitamin D in Humans: A Promising, Non-Invasive and Cost-Effective Method to Measure 25-Hydroxyvitamin D.Biomolecules · 2025Article
- Association of Vitamin D Deficiency and Insufficiency with Pathology in Hospitalized Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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
objectivesThe best indicator of vitamin D level is the determination of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D). Due to the lack of standardization of the available methods, there are problems of precision and reproducibility in its measurement. The objective of this study was to compare the results of 25(OH)D concentration determined by two different immunoassay methods.
designand Methods: 25(OH)D was analyzed in 184 serum samples in an IDS-iSYS Multi-Discipline Automated System Analyzer (Vitro) and in an Alinity i automated Analyzer (Abbott). Then, results were compared. Three groups were considered: group of total patients, group with vitamin D supplements and group without treatment.
resultsOf the total patients, 52.7% received vitamin D supplements. The correlation coefficient of agreement for general group, supplementation group and group without supplementation was 0.92, 0.91 and 0.89, respectively. In all of them, a kappa index>0.75 was obtained.
conclusionsThe assays evaluated are not comparable to each other. Despite this, they show an excellent concordance in the evaluation of the vitamin D status.
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.