238 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3295419)
1. Understanding laboratory test results. Conditions for appropriate use of laboratory tests.
Schwartz JS
Med Clin North Am; 1987 Jul; 71(4):639-52. PubMed ID: 3295419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Interpretative comments and reference ranges in EQA programs as a tool for improving laboratory appropriateness and effectiveness.
Sciacovelli L; Zardo L; Secchiero S; Zaninotto M; Plebani M
Clin Chim Acta; 2003 Jul; 333(2):209-19. PubMed ID: 12849907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A review on the methodology for assessing diagnostic tests.
Linnet K
Clin Chem; 1988 Jul; 34(7):1379-86. PubMed ID: 3292081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Why are clinical laboratory tests performed? When are they valid?
Krieg AF; Gambino R; Galen RS
JAMA; 1975 Jul; 233(1):76-8. PubMed ID: 1173430
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The predictive power of diagnostic tests and the effect of prevalence of illness.
Baldessarini RJ; Finklestein S; Arana GW
Arch Gen Psychiatry; 1983 May; 40(5):569-73. PubMed ID: 6838334
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Laboratory false-positive results: a clinician responsibility or a shared responsibility with requesting clinicians?
Salinas M; Lopez-Garrigós M; Flors L; Leiva-Salinas C
Clin Chem Lab Med; 2013 Sep; 51(9):e199-200. PubMed ID: 23612550
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. A systematic program of quality control in clinical microbiology.
Glasser L; Bosley GS; Boring JR
Am J Clin Pathol; 1971 Sep; 56(3):379-83. PubMed ID: 4937606
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Downstream outcomes: using insurance claims data to screen for errors in clinical laboratory testing.
Mennemeyer ST; Winkelman JW
QRB Qual Rev Bull; 1991 Jun; 17(6):194-9. PubMed ID: 1876394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Quality of bacillus identification tests in the Federal District (Brazil)--a reliability testing].
Kusano MS; Vieira FD; Sarmento AL; Maia R
Rev Bras Enferm; 2001; 54(4):597-607. PubMed ID: 12102049
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Factitious diarrhea induced by stimulant laxatives: accuracy of diagnosis by a clinical reference laboratory using thin layer chromatography.
Shelton JH; Santa Ana CA; Thompson DR; Emmett M; Fordtran JS
Clin Chem; 2007 Jan; 53(1):85-90. PubMed ID: 17110471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Are laboratory results reliable? Serious factors are involved].
Theodorsson E
Lakartidningen; 1997 May; 94(22):2092-6. PubMed ID: 9213666
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Simplified approach to uncertainty of measurement in the clinical virology laboratory.
Newman H; Tshisevhe V
Rev Med Virol; 2018 Nov; 28(6):e2006. PubMed ID: 30112776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. What information on measurement uncertainty should be communicated to clinicians, and how?
Plebani M; Sciacovelli L; Bernardi D; Aita A; Antonelli G; Padoan A
Clin Biochem; 2018 Jul; 57():18-22. PubMed ID: 29402416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Are physicians' office laboratory results of comparable quality to those produced in other laboratory settings?
Hurst J; Nickel K; Hilborne LH
JAMA; 1998 Feb; 279(6):468-71. PubMed ID: 9466642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Reflective testing: adding value to laboratory testing.
Verboeket-van de Venne WP; Aakre KM; Watine J; Oosterhuis WP
Clin Chem Lab Med; 2012 Apr; 50(7):1249-52. PubMed ID: 22850057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Components of quality control.
Hurley AA
Curr Protoc Cytom; 2001 May; Chapter 3():Unit 3.2. PubMed ID: 18770705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Laboratory reporting of hemostasis assays: the final post-analytical opportunity to reduce errors of clinical diagnosis in hemostasis?
Favaloro EJ; Lippi G
Clin Chem Lab Med; 2010 Mar; 48(3):309-21. PubMed ID: 20014957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A theoretical basis for clinically relevant proficiency testing evaluation limits. Sensitivity analysis of the effect of inherent test variability on acceptable method error.
Ross JW
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1988 Apr; 112(4):421-34. PubMed ID: 3355344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. College of American Pathologists' laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing clinical tests.
Aziz N; Zhao Q; Bry L; Driscoll DK; Funke B; Gibson JS; Grody WW; Hegde MR; Hoeltge GA; Leonard DG; Merker JD; Nagarajan R; Palicki LA; Robetorye RS; Schrijver I; Weck KE; Voelkerding KV
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2015 Apr; 139(4):481-93. PubMed ID: 25152313
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
