ArticleCommunications medicine2025
Clinical validation of the Hilab lens for AI supported point of care CBC testing in pediatric oncology.
Article in Communications medicine, 2025. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComplete blood count (CBC) testing is critical for diagnosing and monitoring hematological conditions, including leukemia. However, conventional analyzers require specialized infrastructure and trained personnel, limiting access in resource-constrained settings. Point-of-care hematology devices provide a promising alternative by delivering rapid results with minimal complexity. This study aimed to evaluate the analytical performance of the Hilab Lens versus XE-2100.
methodsBlood samples (n = 555) were analyzed using both devices at Erastinho Hospital, a pediatric oncology center. Device performance was assessed through precision testing, method comparison, sample type equivalence, evaluation of potential interferences, and caregiver satisfaction surveys. Agreement and correlation were evaluated using Bland-Altman plots and Passing-Bablok regression.
resultsHere we show that the Hilab Lens demonstrates high precision and consistency, meeting European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM). Method comparison revealed strong correlations (key analytes r ≥ 0.95), minimal bias, and robust agreement with the reference analyzer across all CBC parameters. The Hilab Lens achieved high accuracy in flagging studies (≥ 98.8%), particularly for band neutrophils and immature cells. No significant interferences were detected (p > 0.5). Caregivers reported high satisfaction with the test (mean score 4.65 on a 5-point scale).
conclusionsThese results support the Hilab Lens as a reliable and accessible alternative to conventional hematology analyzers. Its ease of use and rapid turnaround make it suitable for environments where timely CBC testing is essential. The high acceptance observed in pediatric oncology suggests its potential for broader implementation in clinical practice.
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.