These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
265 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29548924)
21. Critique of the Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement method of estimating and reporting uncertainty in diagnostic assays. Krouwer JS Clin Chem; 2003 Nov; 49(11):1818-21. PubMed ID: 14578312 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Interpreting changes in consecutive laboratory results: clinician's perspectives on clinically significant change. Kim SK; Chung JW; Lim J; Jeong TD; Chang J; Seo M; Lim HS; Kim S Clin Chim Acta; 2023 Aug; 548():117462. PubMed ID: 37390943 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. A plea for intra-laboratory reference limits. Part 1. General considerations and concepts for determination. Haeckel R; Wosniok W; Arzideh F Clin Chem Lab Med; 2007; 45(8):1033-42. PubMed ID: 17867993 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. [The concept of reference change values (RCV). Will it supersede reference intervals?]. Walz B; Fierz W Ther Umsch; 2015 Feb; 72(2):130-5. PubMed ID: 25630296 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Discordance rate, a new concept for combining diagnostic decisions with analytical performance characteristics. 1. Application in method or sample system comparisons and in defining decision limits. Haeckel R; Wosniok W; Puentmann I Clin Chem Lab Med; 2003 Mar; 41(3):347-55. PubMed ID: 12705345 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Estimates of measurement uncertainty from proficiency testing schemes, internal laboratory quality monitoring and during routine enforcement examination of foods. Jarvis B; Corry JE; Hedges AJ J Appl Microbiol; 2007 Aug; 103(2):462-7. PubMed ID: 17650207 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Should we maintain the 95 percent reference intervals in the era of wellness testing? A concept paper. Jørgensen LG; Brandslund I; Hyltoft Petersen P Clin Chem Lab Med; 2004; 42(7):747-51. PubMed ID: 15327009 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Reference change value and measurement uncertainty in the evaluation of tumor markers. Bozkurt Yavuz H; Bildirici MA; Yaman H; Karahan SC; Aliyazıcıoğlu Y; Örem A Scand J Clin Lab Invest; 2021 Nov; 81(7):601-605. PubMed ID: 34543131 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. [Analytical uncertainty--how wrong can a laboratory result be?]. Bolann BJ; Stølsnes B Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 1999 Dec; 119(30):4472-5. PubMed ID: 10827487 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Defining acceptable limits for the metrological traceability of specific measurands. Bais R; Armbruster D; Jansen RT; Klee G; Panteghini M; Passarelli J; Sikaris KA; Clin Chem Lab Med; 2013 May; 51(5):973-9. PubMed ID: 23525873 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Measuring Analytical Quality: Total Analytical Error Versus Measurement Uncertainty. Westgard JO; Westgard SA Clin Lab Med; 2017 Mar; 37(1):1-13. PubMed ID: 28153359 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Functional Reference Limits: Describing Physiological Relationships and Determination of Physiological Limits for Enhanced Interpretation of Laboratory Results. Chuah TY; Lim CY; Tan RZ; Pratumvinit B; Loh TP; Vasikaran S; Markus C; Ann Lab Med; 2023 Sep; 43(5):408-417. PubMed ID: 37080741 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Analytical performance, reference values and decision limits. A need to differentiate between reference intervals and decision limits and to define analytical quality specifications. Petersen PH; Jensen EA; Brandslund I Clin Chem Lab Med; 2011 Dec; 50(5):819-31. PubMed ID: 22628319 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Establish and verify TSH reference intervals using optimized statistical method by analyzing laboratory-stored data. Feng Y; Bian W; Mu C; Xu Y; Wang F; Qiao W; Huang Y J Endocrinol Invest; 2014 Mar; 37(3):277-84. PubMed ID: 24615364 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Measurement uncertainty in clinical chemistry: ISO 20914 versus nordtest or intermediate precision versus bias. Nurlu N; Cat A; Ucar KT Scand J Clin Lab Invest; 2024 May; 84(3):147-153. PubMed ID: 38742707 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Analytical quality specifications for common reference intervals. Ricós C; Doménech MV; Perich C Clin Chem Lab Med; 2004; 42(7):858-62. PubMed ID: 15327023 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Primary care physicians' challenges in ordering clinical laboratory tests and interpreting results. Hickner J; Thompson PJ; Wilkinson T; Epner P; Sheehan M; Pollock AM; Lee J; Duke CC; Jackson BR; Taylor JR J Am Board Fam Med; 2014; 27(2):268-74. PubMed ID: 24610189 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Obtaining reference intervals traceable to reference measurement systems: is it possible, who is responsible, what is the strategy? Panteghini M; Ceriotti F Clin Chem Lab Med; 2011 Dec; 50(5):813-7. PubMed ID: 22628318 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. What information on quality specifications should be communicated to clinicians, and how? Plebani M Clin Chim Acta; 2004 Aug; 346(1):25-35. PubMed ID: 15234633 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Evaluation of uncertainty of measurement in routine clinical chemistry--applications to determination of the substance concentration of calcium and glucose in serum. Linko S; Ornemark U; Kessel R; Taylor PD Clin Chem Lab Med; 2002 Apr; 40(4):391-8. PubMed ID: 12059081 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]