ReviewBiochemia medica2023
Drug interference with biochemical laboratory tests.
Review in Biochemia medica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the interference of 49 commonly used clinical drugs on 60 biochemical tests.Practical laboratory medicine · 2026Article
- Intention-to-diagnose and distinct research foci in diagnostic accuracy studies.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2025Review
- Establishment of adult reference interval of oxalate in spot urine using real-world data.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- The interference of baicalein with uric acid detected by the enzymatic method and its correction method.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessing Non-Laboratory Healthcare Professionals' Attitude towards the Importance of Patient Preparation for Laboratory Tests.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Preanalytical Errors in Clinical Laboratory Testing at a Glance: Source and Control Measures.Cureus · 2024Review
- Retinal Alterations Predict Early Prodromal Signs of Neurodegenerative Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical laboratory practice represents an essential part of clinical decision-making, as it influences 60-70% of medical decisions at all levels of health care. Results of biochemical laboratory tests (BLTs) have a key role in establishment of adequate diagnosis as well as in evaluation of treatment progress and outcome. The prevalence of drug-laboratory test interactions (DLTIs) is up to 43% of patients who had laboratory results influenced by drugs. Unrecognized DLTIs may lead to misinterpreted BLTs results, incorrect or delayed diagnosis, extra costs for unnecessary additional tests or inadequate therapy, as all may cause false clinical decisions. The significance of timely and adequate recognition of DLTIs is to prevent common clinical consequences such as incorrectly interpreted test results, delayed or non-treated condition due to erroneous diagnosis or unnecessary extra tests or therapy. Medical professionals should be educated that it is essential to obtain patient data about medications especially for the drugs used in the last 10 days before biological material collection. Our mini-review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state in this important domain of medical biochemistry with detailed analysis of the effect of drugs on BLTs and to give detailed information to medical specialists.
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.