SynthesisPeerJ2025
Quality assessment from biobank plasma and serum specimens: a systematic review.
Synthesis in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Blood Clotting as an Unintended Cytokine Stimulus in Pregnancy: Why Serum and Plasma are Non-Equivalent Immune Matrices.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2026Article
- Impact of long-term cryopreservation on serum proteome and metallome: Implications for Biobank quality control.PloS one · 2026Article
- The kynurenine pathway in depression and schizophrenia: convergent signals, divergent states, and clinical signatures.EXCLI journal · 2026Review
- Evidence-based standardization of infectious disease biobanking: aligning specimen preservation and clinical metadata withFrontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The European Health Data Space and biobanking in Europe: synergies, tensions and the future governance of data-driven health research.Frontiers in genetics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate assessment of serum and plasma quality is essential for reliable biobanking and research. This systematic review synthesizes 46 studies and shows that current evaluation methods prioritize sample processing delays, freeze-thaw cycles, storage duration, and temperature variations, while neglecting preanalytical factors like medication and diet. Temperature critically affected stability: non-refrigerated samples (8-37 °C) showed 3.2 times more biomarker alterations than refrigerated samples after >24 h delays. Freeze-thaw cycles caused dose-dependent instability, with >10 cycles triggering severe degradation (70% altered biomarkers) and universal enzyme impairment. Even ≤5 cycles significantly altered enzymes (43% affected). Enzymes also degraded over time at <-20 °C, with alteration rates rising from 20% (1-5 years) to 55% (>10 years). The analysis consolidates stability data for enzymes, sterols, cytokines, and metabolites across conditions, providing an evidence-based foundation for quality control. Standardizing procedures to address these gaps will enhance sample integrity, research reliability, and clinical utility. Critically, this review underscores that preexisting biobank collections may have inherent limitations, necessitating careful evaluation of sample history when designing studies.
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.