ReviewEJIFCC2024
Reference Intervals for Blood Chemistry Parameters in the Pakistani Population: A Systematic Review of Published Literature.
Review in EJIFCC, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Reference intervals (RI) are a vital part of information provided with laboratory results. It is recommended that RI should be established by each laboratory following pre-laid guidelines. In this systemic review, we aim to comprehensively analyze and summarize all the published literature about establishment of RI for biochemical parameters in Pakistani population. Methodology: We conducted a comprehensive search using Medline (PubMed interface) and PakMediNet literature, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. The search spanned from January 1984 to February 2024. All studies done for establishment of RI of biochemical parameters were included, while were nonhuman studies, case studies, preprints, no full text and articles in languages other than English were excluded. Rigorous evaluation ensured the robustness of their study analysis. Results: Database search reveled 161 studies, 30 were analyzed as per inclusion criteria. The accumulated sample size of the studies comprised 108,563 individuals. Most of the studies were carried out on adults in Punjab and Sindh provinces. A wide variation was noted among the RIs established and units used in each study. Gaps were identified regarding description of healthy population, patient preparation sample handing and quality control. Conclusion: In this review, critical gaps in data, methodology and reporting were identified. To enhance future studies, researchers should clearly define healthy populations, incorporate rigorous sample handling and quality control, and collaborate across centers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39247659PMC11380145What 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.