ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2026
Development and Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence-Based Two-Step Model for Automated Serum Quality Assessment in Clinical Laboratories.
Article in Annals of laboratory medicine, 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.
- From Detection to Decision Support: Advancing AI-Assisted Serum Quality Assessment.Annals of laboratory medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Enhancing pre-analytical QC in clinical laboratories and providing risk alerts is crucial for ensuring accurate test results for patients whose samples are affected by hemolysis, icterus, or lipemia. We evaluated a novel, self-developed artificial intelligence (AI) approach for assessing serum quality using a two-step deep learning YOLOv5-ResNet-50 architecture model and explored its performance under real-world laboratory conditions. Methods: The performance of the two-step model prototype integrated into a Roche Cobas c 701 module (Roche Diagnostics, Shanghai, China) for preprocessing was assessed. By combining serum index testing with manual evaluation, we established a laboratory-specific model for automated sample quality identification. A primary dataset of 21,000 serum samples was partitioned into a training set (80%) and a validation set (20%) for model development and tuning. Subsequently, a separate, independent test dataset of 21,000 samples was used to conduct the final, unbiased evaluation of the model's performance, with statistical analysis. Results: The AI serum model achieved recognition accuracies exceeding 97% for hemolysis and icterus and over 92% for lipemia. In human-machine comparisons, the AI model demonstrated higher consistency (72% exact agreement) than manual assessments (42%-68% exact agreement). Conclusions: The AI-powered serum quality software demonstrated high accuracy in preanalytical serum quality assessment, offering a performance that meets or exceeds that of both automated and manual measurements. This tool can enhance laboratory efficiency and reduce the error risks associated with subjective visual evaluations.
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.