ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2024
An assessment of analytical performance using the six sigma scale in second-trimester maternal prenatal screening practices in China.
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 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.
- Evaluation of cytokine analytical performance and optimization of quality control strategies using the six sigma model: a multicenter study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the analytical performance of second-trimester maternal serum screening in China, and to compare if there are differences in sigma levels across different methods and months. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted to assess the analytical quality levels of laboratories by calculating the Sigma metrics with prenatal screening biomarkers: AFP, Total β-hCG, free β-hCG, uE3. Data from 591 laboratories were selected. Sigma metrics were computed using the formula: Sigma metrics(σ) = (%TEa - |%Bias|)/%CV. The Friedman test and Mann-Whitney test were used to compare differences across various methods and different months. The Hodges-Lehmann was used for determining 95 % confidence intervals of pseudo-medians. Results: Only uE3 showed significant monthly variations in sigma calculations. However, around 8 % of laboratories across all four analytes demonstrated sigma levels both above 6 and below 3 in different months. Laboratories utilizing time-resolved fluorescence methods significantly outperformed those using chemiluminescence in sigma level. For AFP, the pseudo-median difference between these methods lies within a 95 % confidence interval of (-3.22, -1.93), while for uE3, it is at (-2.30, -1.40). Notably, the median sigma levels for all analytes reached the 4-sigma threshold, with free β-hCG even attaining the 6-sigma level. Conclusion: With current standards, China's second-trimester maternal serum screening is of relatively high analytical quality, and variations in sigma levels exist across different months and methods.
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.