Observational studyScientific reports2022
Evaluation of the usefulness of non-invasive serum haemoglobin measurement in a perioperative setting in a prospective observational study.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Non-Invasive Measurement of Serum Haemoglobin for the Detection of Postpartum Anaemia: A Prospective Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Accuracy of continuous and real-time total hemoglobin during bimaxillary orthognathic surgery.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2025Article
- Diffuse reflectance spectroscopy and RGB-imaging: a comparative study of non-invasive haemoglobin assessment.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Dataset of human skin and fingernails images for non-invasive haemoglobin level assessment.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Comparing Non-Invasive Spectrophotometry to Hematology Analysis for Hemoglobin Measurements in Sickle Cell Disease Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Can Non-Invasive Spectrophotometric Hemoglobin Replace Laboratory Hemoglobin Concentrations for Preoperative Anemia Screening? A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient Blood Management (PBM) programmes seek to reduce the number of missed anaemic patients in the run-up to surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of haemoglobin (Hb) measured non-invasively (SpHb) in preoperative screening for anaemia. We conducted a prospective observational study in a preoperative clinic. Adult patients undergoing examination for surgery who had their Hb measured by laboratory means also had their Hb measured non-invasively by a trained health care provider. 1216 patients were recruited. A total of 109 (9.3%) patients (53 men and 56 women) was found to be anaemic by standard laboratory Hb measurement. Sensitivity for SpHb to detect anaemic patients was 0.50 (95% CI 0.37-0.63) in women and 0.30 (95% CI 0.18-0.43) in men. Specificity was 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.98) in men and 0.93 (95% CI 0.84-1.0) in women. The rate of correctly classified patients was 84.7% for men and 89.4% for women. Positive predictive value for SpHb was 0.50 (95% CI 0.35-0.65) in men and 0.40 (95% CI 0.31-0.50) in women; negative predictive value was 0.93 (95% CI 0.92-0.94) in men and 0.95 (95% CI 0.94-0.96) in women. We conclude that due to low sensitivity, SpHb is poorly suitable for detecting preoperative anaemia in both sexes under standard of care conditions.
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.