ReviewJournal of laboratory physicians2023
A Comparative Review of ICMR, WHO, and EMA Guidelines for Good Clinical Laboratory Practices.
Review in Journal of laboratory physicians, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decoding morbidity patterns in ASHA workers of Vadodara, Gujarat - A cross-sectional study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
- Seasonal variations in haematological and biochemical parameters of healthy Gambian adults: Retrospective study 2018-2022.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Association of coronary artery disease related single nucleotide-polymorphisms with extreme Prakriti types: Insights from a case control study.Journal of Ayurveda and integrative medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the advancement of clinical research and the increased burden on laboratory services, there is an unmet need for guidelines regarding proper laboratory functioning and reliable data generation. Several organizations from all over the world have published guidelines for these clinical and research laboratories. Good Clinical Laboratory Practices (GCLP) are stepwise procedures aimed at strengthening the quality of test results produced by all clinical laboratories engaged in human sample analysis. In this article, we attempt a comparison of the GCLP guidelines recently issued by the Indian Council of Medical Research with the guidelines released by the World Health Organization and the European Medicines Agency. Also, we have included and discussed several suggestions that, if included, will lead to the strengthening of the laboratory practices used for both research and patient care for overall improvement in the Indian healthcare system.
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.