Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36449486›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Blood draw site and analytic device influence hemoglobin measurements.

David W Killilea, Frans A Kuypers, Sandra K Larkin, Kathleen Schultz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The FemTech revolution: Unlocking the potential of new technology for optimizing pregnancy outcomes in low- and middle-income countries and remote areas.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Personalizing computational models to construct medical digital twins.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Personalizing computational models to construct medical digital twins.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

David W KillileaOffice of Research, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8929-6527
Frans A KuypersDivision of Hematology, Department of Pediatrics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Sandra K LarkinDivision of Hematology, Department of Pediatrics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Kathleen SchultzOffice of Research, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anemia is a continuing global public health concern and a priority for international action. The prevalence of anemia is estimated from the hemoglobin (Hb) levels within target populations, yet the procedures for measuring Hb are not standardized and different approaches may result in discrepancies. Several analytical variables have been proposed to influence Hb measurements, but it is difficult to understand the impact on specific variables from large population or field studies. Therefore, we designed a highly controlled protocol that minimized most technical parameters to specifically investigate the impact of blood draw site and analytic device on Hb measurements. A diverse cohort of sixty healthy adults each provided a sequential capillary and venous blood sample that were measured for Hb using an automated hematology analyzer (ADVIA-2120) and two point-of-care devices (HemoCue 201+ and HemoCue 301). Comparing blood draw sites, the mean Hb content was 0.32-0.47 g/dL (2-4%) higher in capillary compared to venous blood from the same donors. Comparing different Hb measuring instruments, the mean Hb content was 0.19-0.46 g/dL (1-4%) higher measured with HemoCue devices compared to ADVIA-2120 in both capillary and venous blood from the same donors. The maximum variance in measurement was also higher with HemoCue devices using blood from venous (5-6% CV) and capillary (21-25% CV) sites compared to ADVIA-2120 (0.6-2% CV). Other variables including blood collection tube manufacturer did not affect mean Hb content. These results demonstrate that even when most technical variables are minimized, the blood draw site and the analytical device can have a small but statistically significant effect on the mean and dispersion of Hb measurements. Even in this study, the few participants identified as mildly anemic using venous blood measured by ADVIA-2120 would not have been classified as anemic using their capillary blood samples or point-of-care analyzers. Thus, caution is warranted when comparing Hb values between studies having differences in blood draw site and Hb measuring device. Future anemia testing should maintain consistency in these analytical variables.

Indexed as

Hematologic TestsVeinsAdultHemoglobinsHumansPoint-of-Care SystemsPublic HealthHemoglobins

Identifiers

PMID36449486
PMCPMC9710840
OpenAlexW4310477225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.