ArticleAdvances in laboratory medicine2023
Compliance to specifications in an external quality assurance program: did new biological variation estimates of the European Federation of Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) affect the quality of laboratory results?
Article in Advances in laboratory medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The results of external quality assurance schemes are evaluated against specifications generally based on biological variation (BV) data. This study was carried out to determine whether new BV values affected the level of compliance to specifications. Our secondary objective was to identify the conditions that would be compromised as a result of poor analytical performance in disease associated markers. Methods: This study was based on the results of the SEQC Results: In 97 of the 133 analytes, the level of compliance was maintained in 80-90 % of the results obtained in the two study periods. In 23 analytes, the level of compliance ranged from 51 to 79 % in the two study periods. In ALT, AST and sodium, the level of compliance was ≤50 % of the results obtained in the first study period, with sodium being the only analyte that maintained this poor level of compliance in the second study period. Conclusions: The level of compliance to specifications remained independent from the specification used (SEQC
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.