ArticleEJIFCC2026
The Truth Lies Within the Gap.
Article in EJIFCC, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We report a case in which a post-analytical transcription error in serum osmolality led to diagnostic delay and unnecessary investigations in a patient with hyponatremia. The principal learning point of this case is that discrepancy between measured and calculated osmolality-the osmolal gap-was critical to detecting the error and redirecting the diagnostic evaluation. A 68-year-old female with a past medical history of hyperlipidemia, hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus, was scheduled for inpatient open reduction and internal fixation of a right distal radius fracture under the Hand surgery service. She was referred to the endocrinologists in view of persistent hyponatremia. Pre-operatively, her serum sodium was 128mmol/L (reference interval 135-145mmol/L), potassium was 4.2mmol/L (3.5-5mmol/L), urea was 4.8mmol/L (2.0-6.5mmol/L), random glucose was 5.2mmol/L (4.0-7.8mmol/L) and measured osmolality was 296 mOsm/Kg (275-300 mOsm/Kg). Records of her previous serum sodium trend were reviewed, and all were within the normal reference interval since 2011. In this case, the serum osmolality was within our laboratory's normal reference interval albeit at the higher end at 296 mOsm/Kg. The initial clinical impression at this point of time was thus normo-osmolar pseudohyponatremia. The clinical pathologist's opinion was requested, and the patient's serum sodium was further evaluated on the RAPIDLab® 1200 Systems Siemens blood gas analyser. This returned a similar sodium result of 128 mmol/L, excluding the possibility of electrolyte exclusion effect on the initial indirect ISE (Beckman Coulter, CA, USA). Upon further investigation, it showed that the osmolal gap was spuriously elevated (30mOsm/kg) due to a transcription error for the measured osmolality, hence confounding the true aetiology of hyponatremia. This case has shown that prompt communication between laboratory professionals and physicians will assist in resolving clinically discordant results. The osmolal gap, in particular, served as a useful adjunct in working up an ambiguous cause of hyponatremia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42729710PMC13563528What 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.