ArticleCureus2026
Comparative Performance of a Routine Immunoturbidimetric Glycated Hemoglobin Assay and High-Pressure Liquid Chromatography Method.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative analysis of hemoglobin a1c measurement methods: inter-device agreement and clinical impact.Scientific reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing is used for the diagnosis of diabetes and glycemic monitoring. This study compares an immunoturbidimetric assay with high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) to assess analytical agreement and determine the clinical suitability of the immunoturbidimetric method for diagnosis versus long-term monitoring in a local setting, in alignment with international standards. Methods A comparative cross-sectional study was conducted in a routine laboratory in Madagascar. Samples were tested on the same day using the Bio-Rad D-10 (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) and Mindray BS-300 (Mindray, Shenzhen, China) automated analyzers. Analytical accuracy was assessed using control materials. The two methods were compared by evaluating the correlation using Pearson's coefficient (r) and linear regression, and the concordance using the Bland-Altman plot and Passing-Bablok regression. The HbA1c results were divided into a total group and subgroups (HbA1c < 6.5%, 6.5-8%, and > 8%). Results Intra-assay, inter-assay, and overall precision are satisfactory (coefficients of variation (CV) <3%) for routine use of both techniques. A good overall correlation between the immunoturbidimetric technique and HPLC was found with r = 0.88. The Bland-Altman plot shows a proportional increase in mean bias with HbA1c values and the regression equation [Formula: see text]. Conclusion This study showed good correlation between the two techniques, but a systematic underestimation of HbA1c levels by the immunoturbidimetry assay was observed, especially for high values.
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.