ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2021
Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D measurement: Comparative evaluation of three automated immunoassays.
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 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The relationship of vitamin D deficiency and childhood diarrhea: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- Association of vitamin D in individuals with periodontitis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical Reclassification of Vitamin D Status Across Three Automated Immunoassays After Comparability Study.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Association of apolipoprotein A1 (rs 5069) genotyping with 25-hydroxyvitamin D deficiency and insulin resistance as a metabolic and genetic difference in obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus.European journal of nutrition · 2026Article
- Vitamin D Deficiency and Maternal Diseases as Risk Factors for the Development of Macrosomia in Newborns.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Observational
- Vitamin D Determinants, Status, and Antioxidant/Anti-inflammatory-Related Effects in Cardiovascular Risk and Disease: Not the Last Word in the Controversy.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- Clinical, metabolic, and immunological characterisation of adult Ugandan patients with new-onset diabetes and low vitamin D status.BMC endocrine disorders · 2022Article
- Article
- Bone Alterations in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Role of Osteoprotegerin.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Epidemiology and Determinants of Vitamin D Deficiency in Eastern Nepal: A Community-Based, Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of endocrinology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesthe different analytical methods for measurement of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) are not yet fully harmonized and no consensus exists on a threshold of 25(OH)D defining a deficiency status. In this study, we compared the results from the assays of serum 25(OH)D performed with three different methods to evaluate the presence of potential biases and how much these biases can influence the assignment of patients to specific 25(OH)D deficiency/sufficiency categories. DESIGN AND
methodsLiaison 25(OH) Vitamin D Total (DiaSorin Liaison XL), Elecsys Vitamin D Total II (Roche Elecsys) and Lumipulse G25(OH) Vitamin D (Fujirebio Lumipulse G1200) were used. Methods comparability was established performing Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman analysis to prove whether the differences found were lower than the preliminarily pre-established maximum acceptable bias.
resultsall Passing-Bablok regressions exhibited the presence of a proportional and constant systematic error. Bland-Altman analysis revealed biases well above the maximum acceptable bias, so the 25(OH)D concentrations measured were not comparable. To evaluate whether the three methods had the same ability to classify patients into different categories of vitamin D levels, we categorized results obtained by each method in reference classes. Lumipulse categorized most patients into the class with the lowest 25(OH)D concentrations (<20 ng/mL) whereas Elecsys ranked the lowest number.
conclusionsLiaison XL and Elecsys have shown good accuracy compared to Lumipulse in measuring 25(OH)D levels. Nevertheless, the assays were not interchangeable due to the lack of comparability of results as well as to the disagreement in classification of hormone deficiency or sufficiency.
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.