ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Comparison of erythrocyte sedimentation rate measurement between Westergren method and automated method among patients attending Jigjiga University Sheik Hassen Yabare Referral Hospital, Jigjiga, Ethiopia.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analytical Agreement Between the Vision C Automated ESR Analyzer and the Manual Westergren Reference Method: A Prospective Method Comparison Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Is full automation in ESR measurement clinically reliable? Revisiting a classic test.Advances in laboratory medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluating the ciprofloxacin potentiation efficacy of repurposed drug flupentixol through efflux pump inhibition of pathogenic bacteria.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is a widely used screening test in clinical practice as an indicator of inflammatory and degenerative malignant diseases. The Westergren method, renowned as the gold standard, is valued for its accuracy and cost-effectiveness but demands considerable time and blood volume. Emerging automated methods offer quicker and more convenient alternatives, aiming to replace manual techniques. Nonetheless, validating these automated methods against the reference Westergren method is essential to ensure reliability. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate ESR measurement results obtained from both the reference Westergren method and the automated (SFRI ESR 3000) method. Methods: A Hospital-based comparative cross-sectional study was conducted at Jigjiga University Sheik Hassen Yabare Referral Hospital from July 15 to September 16, 2023. Following the acquisition of informed consent, blood samples were obtained from 158 participants, five milliliters of blood from each participant. These samples were then subjected to ESR estimation using both the Westergren (reference) method and the automated (SFRI ESR 3000) method. Subsequently, the collected data were analyzed using SPSS version 20 and MedCalc version 12.3.0.0 statistical Softwares. Statistical analyses such as Paired Results: The paired sample Conclusions: The SFRI ESR 300 automated method demonstrates the potential for interchangeable use with the Westergren method for determining ESR, given the strong correlation and good agreement. Additionally, the same reference range could be applied during interpretation.
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.