ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2022
Performance evaluation of a point of care cartridge of the new GEM Premier ChemSTAT analyzer.
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Evaluation of a Point-of-Care GEM Premier ChemSTAT Analyzer in an Emergency Department: Prevention of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy and Optimization of Patient Flow.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Analytical Performances of the Novel i-STAT Alinity Point-of-Care Analyzer.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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: GEM Premier ChemSTAT is a new point-of-care system providing rapid creatinine, BUN and tCO Materials and methods: Heparinized whole blood samples from different clinical locations were evaluated on the GEM Premier ChemSTAT and results compared to plasma from the same samples on the Beckman AU5800 or whole blood on the GEM Premier 4000. Precision studies were conducted with whole blood and quality control material. Results: ChemSTAT correlated well with plasma samples on the AU5800 (regression slopes (S): 0.957-1.159, correlation coefficients (r)≥0.952) and with whole blood specimens on the GEM Premier 4000 (S: 0.9646-1.124, r ≥ 0.974). The repeatability was 0.1%-3.1% and QC precision were within lab and manufacturers' specifications. Conclusion: ChemSTAT demonstrated strong correlation to the comparative methods and excellent precision. Combining with its continuous quality management, ChemSTAT is suitable for acute care settings to provide rapid, reliable results, which could minimize time-to-treatment and improve patient outcome.
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.