ArticleAmerican journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council2024
Harmonization of four biomarkers across nine nationally representative studies of older persons.
Article in American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionA growing number of international population surveys have included measurement of biomarkers, but differ in the type of specimens collected, sample processing procedures, shipment protocols, and laboratory assay platforms. The purpose of this study is to harmonize biomarker data from nine nationally representative studies of people 50 years of age and over by adjusting for assay platforms and type of specimens for total cholesterol (total-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and C-reactive protein (CRP).
methodsSets of 24 identical serum, plasma, whole blood, and dried blood spot harmonization samples with known analyte levels were generated at a reference laboratory, shipped at -80°C to the respective study laboratories, and subsequently assayed following the study laboratory's protocol. Both original and harmonized study data were used to calculate mean values and at-risk prevalence.
resultsThe correlation coefficients between the biomarker values of the harmonization samples obtained by the study laboratories and the reference laboratory were 0.99 or above for all analytes and laboratories, indicating the high quality of assays at all laboratories. However, using the harmonized data from each study, there were significant differences in the mean values and country ranking of the prevalence of at-risk levels of these four biomarkers.
conclusionsWhile the biomarker data from the different study laboratories were highly correlated, indicating very high correlation of rank order of specimens, absolute values did vary significantly. This can have a major impact on assessment of international differences in estimates of risks for chronic morbidity and mortality.
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.