ArticleEJIFCC2024
A Pilot Survey on Quality Control and Method Evaluation Practices in Clinical Laboratories in Nepal.
Article in EJIFCC, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of best practices for quality assurance in laboratories in Portuguese-speaking countries.EJIFCC · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is a lack of systematic collection of information on the quality control practice and method evaluation approach in clinical laboratories in Nepal. Such data is important to formulate educational activities and policy that may address any potential knowledge and practice gap identified. Method: The pilot survey included twelve questions regarding quality control practice and method evaluation approach and was distributed among the laboratory medicine professionals in Kathmandu, Nepal. Data were collected using a structured self-reported questionnaire on the Google Docs platform. A total of 43 responses were received. Results: Internal quality control and method evaluation practice varied considerably in terms of the number of levels of material used, frequency of analysis, type and source of material and acceptance criteria among responding laboratories. Conclusion: The variability in quality control practice and method evaluation approach highlights need for augmentation of knowledge, attitude, and practice behavior among laboratory professionals in Nepal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39507576PMC11536274What 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.