Exploring Ethical Perspectives in Laboratory Medicine: A Survey of Laboratory Professionals at the Annual Conference in Nepal.

Vivek Pant, Santosh Pradhan, Ranjan Suwal, Ram Vinod Mahato

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in EJIFCC, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Vivek PantDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Samyak Diagnostic Pvt Ltd, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Santosh PradhanDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Samyak Diagnostic Pvt Ltd, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Ranjan SuwalDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Ram Vinod MahatoAssistant Professor at Tribhuvan University, Ayurveda Campus, Kirtipur, Institute of Medicine, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to explore the ethical perspectives of laboratory professionals in Nepal regarding laboratory medicine practices. A survey was conducted among participants at the annual conference of laboratory professionals in Nepal in April 2024, with a total of 32 complete responses collected. The survey consisted of questions categorized into three phases of laboratory practice: pre-examination (4 questions), examination (4 questions), and post-examination (5 questions). Each section addressed specific ethical considerations and practices within these phases, including issues related to sample collection, testing accuracy, result interpretation, and reporting. The responses were analyzed to identify trends, challenges, and areas where ethical standards in laboratory medicine could be improved. The findings highlight the need for greater awareness and training in ethical practices, with particular emphasis on improving consistency and transparency across all phases of laboratory work.

Indexed as

EthicsLaboratory EthicsLaboratory MedicineLaboratory Practice

Identifiers

PMID41098211

PMCPMC12519674

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY-NC

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.