Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37700849›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition2023

Quality analysis of the clinical laboratory literature and its effectiveness on clinical quality improvement: a systematic review.

Ahmed Shabbir Chaudhry, Yu Inata, Etsuko Nakagami-Yamaguchi

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Application and Impact of Quality Assurance Dashboards in Cytology Laboratories-The CytoLog Application.Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology · 2026
    Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ahmed Shabbir ChaudhryDepartment of Medical Quality and Safety Science, Osaka City University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-4-3 Asahi-machi, Abeno-ku, Osaka 545-8585, Japan.
Yu InataDepartment of Medical Quality and Safety Science, Osaka City University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-4-3 Asahi-machi, Abeno-ku, Osaka 545-8585, Japan.
Etsuko Nakagami-YamaguchiDepartment of Medical Quality and Safety Science, Osaka Metropolitan University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-4-3 Asahi-machi, Abeno-ku, Osaka 545-8585, Japan.
Osaka City University · JPOsaka Metropolitan UniversityOsaka Women's and Children's Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality improvement in clinical laboratories is crucial to ensure accurate and reliable test results. With increasing awareness of the potential adverse effects of errors in laboratory practice on patient outcomes, the need for continual improvement of laboratory services cannot be overemphasized. A literature search was conducted on PubMed and a web of science core collection between October and February 2021 to evaluate the scientific literature quality of clinical laboratory quality improvement; only peer-reviewed articles written in English that met quality improvement criteria were included. A structured template was used to extract data, and the papers were rated on a scale of 0-16 using the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS). Out of 776 studies, 726 were evaluated for clinical laboratory literature quality analysis. Studies were analyzed according to the quality improvement and control methods and interventions, such as training, education, task force, and observation. Results showed that the average score of QI-MQCS for quality improvement papers from 1981-2000 was 2.5, while from 2001-2020, it was 6.8, indicating continuous high-quality improvement in the clinical laboratory sector. However, there is still room to establish a proper system to judge the quality of clinical laboratory literature and improve accreditation programs within the sector.

Indexed as

analytical qualityperformance evaluationQI-MQCStotal quality management

Identifiers

PMID37700849
PMCPMC10493209
OpenAlexW4383334998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.