ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2026
Evaluation and application of automated quality control in clinical coagulation testing.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Internal quality control (IQC) is indispensable for ensuring the accuracy of clinical laboratory testing. While fully automated track systems have enabled standardized IQC for clinical chemistry and hematology, coagulation assays-despite their diagnostic importance-still depend on manual handling. Variability during critical preparatory steps such as rewarming, thawing, mixing, and aliquoting of control materials often leads to QC instability and misinterpretation. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical applicability of automated internal quality control (auto-QC) detection using a fully automated sample processing system. Methods: To analyze the performance of auto-QC in coagulation testing, the stability, detection efficiency, and QC completion time of the auto-QC and concurrently acquired manual QC (immediate reconstitution) methods were compared at the Department of Laboratory Medicine at Suining Central Hospital (October 2024 to February 2025) and at Ordos Central Hospital (November 2024 to February 2025). Results: At Suining Central Hospital, auto-QC yielded lower coefficients of variation (CVs) than manual QC for activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), prothrombin time (PT), and multiple levels of D-dimer (DD), as well as low and high levels of fibrin degradation product (FDP), but had a higher CV for FDPs at the middle level (2.63% vs 2.46%). For thrombin time (TT), auto-QC had a lower CV at the normal level (1.00% vs 1.56%) but a higher CV at the abnormal level (1.96% vs 1.80%). For fibrinogen (FIB), auto-QC had a higher CV at the normal level (3.43% vs 3.14%) but a lower CV at the abnormal level (2.31% vs 2.56%). At Ordos Central Hospital, auto-QC yielded lower CVs than manual QC for APTT, TT, FIB, DD, and FDP at both levels, and for PT at the normal level; for PT at the abnormal level, auto-QC had a marginally higher CV (3.37% vs 3.26%). Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed significantly higher σ values for auto-QC ( Conclusion: The fully automated sample processing system's QC detection meets laboratory quality requirements, significantly shortens processing time, reduces workload, and improves work efficiency.
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.