ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2025
Patient-based pre-classified real-time quality control with neural network (PCRTQC-NN).
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 2025. 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.
- Challenges in PT/INR harmonization across the total testing process.Biochemia medica · 2026Review
- A Comparative Study of the Clinical Laboratory Quality Control Performance of AI-PBRTQC and Traditional PBRTQC Model in Tumor Marker Testing.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Patient-based real-time quality control (PBRTQC) is essential for clinical laboratory management but struggles with detecting small systematic errors. This study presents the patient-based pre-classified real-time quality control with neural network (PCRTQC-NN) model, utilizing neural networks to improve error detection by extracting analytical features from testing instruments. Methods: Using PCRTQC's clustering analysis, we pre-classified and processed Na, CHOL, ALT, and CR data from 611,031 patients. A neural network autoencoder, trained using TensorFlow with mean squared error (MSE) as the loss function, extracted the testing instrument's analytical features under error-free conditions. Systematic errors were identified by comparing reconstruction residuals between test and reconstructed data. The average number of patient samples until error detection (ANPed) evaluated the model performance. Results: The PCRTQC-NN's error detection surpasses traditional algorithms Compared to PCRTQC, it reduced the ANPed for ALT by 37 % (constant error, CE) and 22 % (proportional error, PE) at 1 total error allowable (TEa), with comparable results for other analytes. For 0.5 TEa errors, the ANPed for CHOL decreased by 23 % (CE) and 22 % (PE), for ALT by 14 % (CE) and 6 % (PE), and for CR by 4 % (CE) and 9 % (PE), enhancing error detection capabilities for analytes with high inter-individual variability and sensitivity to smaller errors. Conclusions: PCRTQC-NN significantly enhances systematic error detection compared to PCRTQC, leveraging autoencoders to extract analytical features as discrete signals, thus improving SNR for high-variability analytes. It promises improved laboratory efficiency and inter-laboratory standardization via robust feature models. Future multi-center studies will validate broad applicability across diverse settings.
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.