ArticleNigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association
Verification of the HbA1c method on the STANDARD F2400
Article in Nigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association. 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: For methods that report quantitatively, an assessment of their imprecision and bias should be assessed in the laboratory before their deployment into routine service. This study assessed these parameters of the HbA1C method on the STANDARD F2400® point of care analyzer. These parameters were further combined to generate sigma metrics for the method. Methodology: An external quality assurance (EQA) material from the Randox International Quality Assessment Scheme (RIQAS) was analysed according to the EP15 protocol of the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute in SYNLAB Nigeria Laboratory Quality Assurance Department. Estimates of precision and an assessment of bias were determined from the data which consisted of 5 replicates per day for 5 consecutive days. Precision estimates were compared with manufacturer-provided information and estimates of bias were compared with the verification interval for the target value provided by RIQAS. Sigma metrics were determined for total allowable error (TAE) of 8% and 10%. Results: The grand mean (standard deviation) for the study was 4.95 (0.15) %. The Within-run CV and within laboratory CV were 1.28% and 1.86%, respectively. These were within the manufacturer claims of 1.70% and 1.90%, also respectively. The target value by RIQAS was 5.04(0.24) % with a calculated verification interval of 4.95 - 5.13%. The sigma metrics for the method at TAE of 8% and 10% were 4.8/3.3 and 6.3/4.3 within the run/within laboratory estimates respectively. Conclusion: The HbA1C method on the STANDARD F2400® Analyzer displayed performance characteristics that are consistent with manufacturer specifications and are above industry standard quality for a point-of-care device for HbA1C. These suggest that may be used to support routine monitoring of persons with diabetes mellitus in Nigeria.
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.