ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Laboratory quality management system fundamentals.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Development and validation of a rule-based tool for quality management reporting in a genetics laboratory.Practical laboratory medicine · 2026Article
- Developing core competencies to reform medical laboratory scientists' curricula in Low-Middle-Income Countries (LMIC).BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Translating laboratory quality management system into practice: strategic opportunities and challenges for ISO 15189:2022 implementation in Nigeria's healthcare system.Frontiers in health services · 2026Review
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
A laboratory quality management system (LQMS) enables the effective operation of laboratories of all types and sizes. With rapid advances in technology (e.g., artificial intelligence and machine learning, advanced manufacturing) comes the need for laboratories worldwide to conduct proper change management and process improvement to meet the continued demand amidst major changes. In order to do so while ensuring that results and data are accurate, timely, and reproducible, it is crucial for laboratories to sustain a foundational LQMS that accommodates laboratory processes, document and records management, and a path for continual improvement in the laboratory itself and within its contextual organization. A foundational LQMS provides a framework to address gaps in process or product performance and risks present throughout the laboratory's workflow, any of which could lead to a critical error that compromises the organization's credibility. There are many LQMS frameworks-benchmarks such as consensus standards or regulations (e.g., Good Laboratory Practices for Nonclinical Laboratory Studies) - that the laboratory can select from to govern its LQMS. While these frameworks vary in applicability, there are several common elements across these frameworks that can serve as the basic components of any LQMS. The aim of this study is to review and assess 12 widely-recognized, fundamental aspects of an LQMS to identify actionable examples and templates that can enable effective implementation of a robust LQMS. A robust LQMS is one that fosters long term success of the laboratory, and which ultimately ensures reliable results, efficient operations, and the protection of public health.
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.