Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36045052›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of laboratory medicine2023

Calibration Practices in Clinical Mass Spectrometry: Review and Recommendations.

Wan Ling Cheng, Corey Markus, Chun Yee Lim, Rui Zhen Tan, Sunil Kumar Sethi, Tze Ping Loh, IFCC Working Group on Method Evaluation Protocols

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Simultaneous ManNAc and Neu5Ac Quantification in Human Sera by LC-MS/MS.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Wan Ling ChengDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-7857-0343
Corey MarkusFlinders University International Centre for Point-of-Care Testing, Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5594-9737
Chun Yee LimEngineering Cluster, Singapore Institute of Technology, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-1837-2705
Rui Zhen TanEngineering Cluster, Singapore Institute of Technology, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-7464-5245
Sunil Kumar SethiDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Tze Ping LohDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-4272-0001
IFCC Working Group on Method Evaluation Protocols
National University Hospital · SGSingapore Institute of Technology · SGFlinders University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Calibration is a critical component for the reliability, accuracy, and precision of mass spectrometry measurements. Optimal practice in the construction, evaluation, and implementation of a new calibration curve is often underappreciated. This systematic review examined how calibration practices are applied to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry measurement procedures. Methods: The electronic database PubMed was searched from the date of database inception to April 1, 2022. The search terms used were "calibration," "mass spectrometry," and "regression." Twenty-one articles were identified and included in this review, following evaluation of the titles, abstracts, full text, and reference lists of the search results. Results: The use of matrix-matched calibrators and stable isotope-labeled internal standards helps to mitigate the impact of matrix effects. A higher number of calibration standards or replicate measurements improves the mapping of the detector response and hence the accuracy and precision of the regression model. Constructing a calibration curve with each analytical batch recharacterizes the instrument detector but does not reduce the actual variability. The analytical response and measurand concentrations should be considered when constructing a calibration curve, along with subsequent use of quality controls to confirm assay performance. It is important to assess the linearity of the calibration curve by using actual experimental data and appropriate statistics. The heteroscedasticity of the calibration data should be investigated, and appropriate weighting should be applied during regression modeling. Conclusions: This review provides an outline and guidance for optimal calibration practices in clinical mass spectrometry laboratories.

Indexed as

CalibrationChromatography, LiquidHumansMass SpectrometryReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsCalibrationLinearityMass spectrometryRegressionStatistics

Identifiers

PMID36045052
PMCPMC9467832
OpenAlexW4294124433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.