ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2022
Inter-laboratory comparison of semiquantitative allergen-specific Immunoglobulin E test: 7 years of experience in Korea.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concordance between crude extract and component allergens in a multiple allergen simultaneous test: a large-scale retrospective analysis.British journal of biomedical science · 2026Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Four Multiple Allergen Simultaneous Test (MAST) Systems in Clinical Practice.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2026Article
- Decoding allergy in vitro: Challenges and clinical use of humoral and cellular methods.Allergologie select · 2026Review
- Inter-laboratory comparison of semiquantitative allergen-specific Immunoglobulin E test: 7 years of experience in Korea.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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionMultiple allergen simultaneous test (MAST) is widely used as a screening tool for allergic diseases and has the advantage of providing specific IgE (sIgE) results for various allergens in semiquantitative class. We have continuously conducted external quality assessment (EQA) since 2012 for clinical laboratories performing MAST using AdvanSure allergy screen test (LG CHEM, Korea). This study provides an account of the EQA experience.
methodsSamples were prepared using pooled sera collected from patients with suspected allergic disease and sent to each laboratory twice a year. Each round included 4-6 serum samples with sIgE for 10-20 inhaled or food allergens. The acceptable class value was the most frequently reported MAST class ±1 titer that exceeded 80% of the total laboratory results.
resultsThe average number of participating laboratories was 76 (49-90) and the average response rate was 97.3% during the entire survey period. The acceptable rates were consistently high at 97.7% ± 3.7%. Of the total 537 trials, 18 trials (3.4%) were regarded as nonconsensus results, in which acceptable answers did not exceed 80%. For unacceptable results, the false-negative rate (1.5% ± 2.8%) was higher than the false-positive rate (0.8% ± 2.7%) (p < 0.001). MAST class results were correlated with quantitative IgE results by ImmunoCAP (Spearman's correlation coefficient of 0.682 (p < 0.001) and gamma index of 0.777 (p < 0.001).
conclusionAlthough EQA for MAST showed a high level of acceptable answer, some allergen assays require harmonization. Continuous performance of systematic EQA is needed to improve the accuracy of sIgE assays and quality control in clinical laboratories.
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.