ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2024
Unified calibration of D-dimer can improve the uniformity of different detection systems.
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: D-dimer at a low level is important evidence for excluding the onset and progression of thrombosis. It is readily detectable and yields rapid results, although significant variability exists among different detection systems. Our study aims to enhance the consistency across various detection systems. Methods: Twelve detection systems were included in our study. We sought to address this inconsistency by using various calibrators (two supplied by manufacturers and two comprising pooled human plasma diluted with different diluents) to standardize D-dimer measurements. We categorized the data into three groups according to D-dimer concentration levels: low (≤0.5 mg/L), medium (>0.5 mg/L - <3 mg/L), and high (≥3 mg/L). We then analyzed the data focusing on range, consistency, comparability, negative coincidence rate, and false negative rate. Results: Calibrating with pooled human plasma led to narrower result ranges in the low and medium groups (P < 0.05). In the low group, consistency improved from weak to strong (ICC 0.4-0.7, P﹤0.05), while it remained excellent in the other groups and overall (ICC﹥0.75, P﹤0.05). The percentage of pairwise comparability increased in both the low and high groups. Additionally, there was an increase in the negative coincidence rate. Conclusion: These findings demonstrate that uniform calibration of D-dimer can significantly enhance the consistency of results across different detection systems.
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.