A Pre-Analytical Performance Evaluation for Measurement of Serum Creatinine in a Multicenter Clinical Trial Study.
Clicks: 368
ID: 64203
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
79.6
/100
368 views
260 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #3 of 13 articles by views in Clinical laboratory
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Our multicenter clinical trial study for stage 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) populations was conducted at 21 centers in China during the period 2011 to 2016. The CKD definition is based on glomerular filtration rate (GFR) values which can be estimated by creatinine-based predictive formulas. The validity and reliability of GFR estimation is thus largely dependent on the accurate and precise serum creatinine (SCr) measurements. As an integral part of this multicenter study, it is important to ensure the precision, accuracy, and center-to-center comparability of the SCr results.Prior to initiating the study, we unified the measurement method of SCr determination as an enzymatic method and standardized the procedure in all of the laboratories. Then, the analytical performance of each analyzer at each laboratory was evaluated, including precision, accuracy, and comparability.All within-run and total CVs of the low and high level internal quality control (IQC) were comprised between 0.2% and 4.1% (< 1/3 CLIA'88). Total error of the IQC fall within the maximum 12% at all centers. The analytical bias against the Standard Reference material 967a target was less than ± 0.5% at Central Laboratory, indicating good accuracy. Correlation between the analyzers and the reference method were very high (r > 0.99). Passing-Bablok regression showed no significant deviation from linearity (p > 0.05). Bland-Altman analysis also showed good agreement (≥ 95% of results fell within the 95% limits of agreement).Performance evaluation helped in addressing preanalytical variations in measurement and gave op-timal quality assurance of laboratory measurement in the context of a multicenter clinical trial study.
| Reference Key |
wan2019aclinical
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Wan, Zemin;Zhang, Lu;Ke, Peifeng;Chao, Yan;Mao, Wei;Huang, Xianzhang;Zhuang, Junhua;Zhang, Lei;Li, Chuang;Wu, Yifan;Liu, Xusheng;Xu, Jianhua; |
| Journal | Clinical laboratory |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
10.7754/Clin.Lab.2019.190352
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.