ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2024
Analysis of Laboratory Critical Values During COVID-19 Pandemic at Tertiary Hospital in Saudi Arabia.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2024. 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.
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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: One of the most important aspects of post-analytical laboratory activity is the notification of critical results. Therefore, the aim of this study was to illustrate and analyze the prevalence of critical result values of our clinical laboratory investigations during the pandemic stages of coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) and other research pre-pandemic stages. Methods: The seven-month study was conducted between May 2020 and November 2020. Laboratory data of critical results were collected in this retrospective cohort. Results: In total, 221,384 routine tests and 84,451 STAT tests were performed in our clinical laboratory. Of the 3183 (1.44%) tests result was identified as having Critical values, consisting of 2220 (69.74%) and 963 (30.25%) tests in biochemistry and hematology assays. Among the tests with critical values, 39.6% of which were from emergency department (ED) as STAT testing (1262) and 60.3% (1921) as TAT testing. Testing was found in routine inpatients and outpatients, 58% and 2.3%, respectively, and the most frequent parameter notified was sodium. Conclusion: In our practice, we observed that the higher level of frequency of critical values results is related to inpatients, contradicting several researchers reporting that the higher percentages of critical values were from ED.
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.