ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2022
Analytical performance evaluation of different test systems on serum creatinine assay.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analytical Imprecision and Reference Change Values for Longitudinal Monitoring of NCD-Related Biochemical Analytes.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Association of different serum creatinine trajectories with 28-day mortality in patients with acute kidney injury on chronic kidney disease: based on the MIMIC-IV database.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Analytical performance evaluation of different test systems on serum creatinine assay.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSerum creatinine (SCr) is a useful diagnostic marker for the assessment of renal function. Accurate quantitation of SCr is clinically important in calculation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR).
methodTo confirm whether there are differences in SCr between enzymatic kits of different manufacturers, the analytical performance of the matched and open test system in the measurement of SCr was evaluated. The analytical performance evaluation was conducted according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines. Precision, accuracy, linearity, dilution, lower limit of measurement and analytical interference were studied between the two test systems.
resultsThe performance of SCr from the open test system was in compliance with the matched test system with good precision, accuracy, and linearity. In presence of most common interferents, both test systems could lead to accurate creatinine results except for the existence of specified drugs. For dobutamine, the open test system showed better anti-interference performance than the matched system.
conclusionThis study provides referable opinions for clinical laboratory selection on the test system and a framework for future analogous studies based on different test systems.
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.