Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42840373›Full record

ReviewJMA journal2026

How to Interpret the Complete Blood Count in Daily Practice: A Practical Framework for Clinical Decision-making.

Akiyoshi Takami

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMA journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Akiyoshi TakamiDivision of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Aichi Medical University School of Medicine, Nagakute, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The complete blood count (CBC) is one of the most frequently used laboratory tests in clinical practice and is often the first abnormal finding that prompts further evaluation. However, its interpretation is often limited to identifying values outside reference ranges, which may lead to both overinterpretation of minor abnormalities and under-recognition of serious disease. The CBC provides a rapid and integrated reflection of hematopoiesis and systemic physiology. Subtle combinations of abnormalities across multiple cell lineages, discordance between indices, and inappropriate marrow responses may represent early clues to conditions such as bone marrow failure, hemolysis, severe infection, and hematologic malignancy. In this review, we propose a practical, physiology-based framework for CBC interpretation designed for general physicians. This emphasizes simultaneous assessment of the three hematopoietic lineages, integration of key parameters, including reticulocyte count and cell size variability, and interpretation based on underlying pathophysiologic processes, including production, destruction or consumption, distribution, and reactive changes. In addition, we highlight common pitfalls related to spurious results and analyzer limitations and outline clinically important red flag patterns that require urgent evaluation. By applying this structured, physiology-based approach, clinicians can use the CBC more effectively to guide diagnostic reasoning, prioritize further investigations, and identify patients who require timely intervention. The CBC should therefore be used not merely as a screening test, but as a practical tool for clinical decision-making in daily practice.

Indexed as

absolute neutrophil countcomplete blood countimmature platelet fractionred blood cell indicesreticulocyte

Identifiers

PMID42840373
PMCPMC13639491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.