ArticleBMC medical education2025
Assessment of centrifugation knowledge among medical laboratory personnel: a survey-based study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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.
- The Presence and Nature of AI-Use Disclosure Statements in Medical Education Journals: A Bibliometric Study.Perspectives on medical education · 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
backgroundThis survey study aims to evaluate knowledge of centrifuge operation and adherence to centrifugation protocols among laboratory personnel. These aspects are crucial in preventing pre-analytical errors. Additionally, the study seeks to assess the equipment infrastructure and staffing status within the participants' institutions.
methodsThe study involved 397 participants from various medical laboratories. A 16-item survey, using a 5-point Likert scale, was utilized to assess theoretical and practical knowledge of centrifuge operation. Two groups of subscales were developed, with one focusing on theoretical and practical knowledge and the other on pre-centrifugation, centrifugation, and post-centrifugation processes. Demographic data were collected, and the reliability of the survey was analyzed using Cronbach's alpha (0.94). Validity was assessed through factor analysis.
resultsThe majority of participants were female (63%) and worked as laboratory technicians (72%). Approximately 71% had never received formal centrifuge training, and significant differences were observed between theoretical and practical knowledge, particularly among laboratory technicians (P < 0.001). Education level and job title also influenced knowledge scores (P < 0.001).
conclusionThe developed survey scale demonstrated high reliability and validity, indicating its potential as a valuable reference for future studies assessing centrifugation competency and usage in laboratory environments. These findings underline the need for improved training programs to reduce pre-analytical errors and enhance overall laboratory performance.
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.