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.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search


458 related items for PubMed ID: 16683868

  • 21. Quality indicators of blood utilization: three College of American Pathologists Q-Probes studies of 12,288,404 red blood cell units in 1639 hospitals.
    Novis DA, Renner S, Friedberg R, Walsh MK, Saladino AJ.
    Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2002 Feb; 126(2):150-6. PubMed ID: 11825109
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. Hospital nursing satisfaction with clinical laboratory services: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 162 institutions.
    Jones BA, Walsh MK, Ruby SG.
    Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2006 Dec; 130(12):1756-61. PubMed ID: 17149946
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. Clinical hematology practices at veterinary teaching hospitals and private diagnostic laboratories.
    Gaunt SD, Prescott-Mathews JS, King WW, Scholl DT.
    Vet Clin Pathol; 1995 Dec; 24(2):64-67. PubMed ID: 12664435
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. Preliminary evaluation of the new hematology analyzer COULTER GEN-S in a university hospital.
    Picard F, Gicquel C, Marnet L, Guesnu M, Levy JP.
    Clin Chem Lab Med; 1999 Jun; 37(6):681-6. PubMed ID: 10475078
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25. Evaluation of a total hematology analysis system (Sysmex HS-430). Benefits for large laboratories by reducing manual work load and optimizing screening efficacy for pathologic samples.
    Födinger M, Speiser W, Karabentcheva S, Scherrer R, Veitl M, Schwarzinger I.
    Am J Clin Pathol; 1995 Nov; 104(5):503-9. PubMed ID: 7572809
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. Effective and Practical Complete Blood Count Delta Check Method and Criteria for the Quality Control of Automated Hematology Analyzers.
    Kim MS, Park CJ, Namgoong S, Kim SI, Cho YU, Jang S.
    Ann Lab Med; 2023 Sep 01; 43(5):418-424. PubMed ID: 37080742
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. Evaluation of the Beckman Coulter AcT 5 diff AL hematology analyzer in a hospital setting.
    Bhuta UM, Ulstein H.
    Lab Hematol; 2003 Sep 01; 9(3):167-74. PubMed ID: 14521325
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28. Laboratory practices for manual blood film review: Results of an IQMH patterns of practice survey.
    Leung E, Johnston A, Olsen B, Chang H, Martin T, Wozniak M, Good D.
    Int J Lab Hematol; 2021 Apr 01; 43(2):184-190. PubMed ID: 32940011
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29. Evaluation of criteria of manual blood smear review following automated complete blood counts in a large university hospital.
    Comar SR, Malvezzi M, Pasquini R.
    Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter; 2017 Apr 01; 39(4):306-317. PubMed ID: 29150102
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. The international consensus group for hematology review: suggested criteria for action following automated CBC and WBC differential analysis.
    Barnes PW, McFadden SL, Machin SJ, Simson E, international consensus group for hematology.
    Lab Hematol; 2005 Apr 01; 11(2):83-90. PubMed ID: 16024331
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Automated blood cell counts: state of the art.
    Buttarello M, Plebani M.
    Am J Clin Pathol; 2008 Jul 01; 130(1):104-16. PubMed ID: 18550479
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32. Urine culture contamination: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 127 laboratories.
    Bekeris LG, Jones BA, Walsh MK, Wagar EA.
    Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2008 Jun 01; 132(6):913-7. PubMed ID: 18517272
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. Performance evaluation of the new hematology analyzer Sysmex XN-series.
    Seo JY, Lee ST, Kim SH.
    Int J Lab Hematol; 2015 Apr 01; 37(2):155-64. PubMed ID: 24815300
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. A Comparison of Mindray BC-6800, Sysmex XN-2000, and Beckman Coulter LH750 Automated Hematology Analyzers: A Pediatric Study.
    Ciepiela O, Kotuła I, Kierat S, Sieczkowska S, Podsiadłowska A, Jenczelewska A, Księżarczyk K, Demkow U.
    J Clin Lab Anal; 2016 Nov 01; 30(6):1128-1134. PubMed ID: 27184780
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35. ICSH guidelines for the verification and performance of automated cell counters for body fluids.
    Bourner G, De la Salle B, George T, Tabe Y, Baum H, Culp N, Keng TB, International Committee for Standardization in Hematology (ICSH).
    Int J Lab Hematol; 2014 Dec 01; 36(6):598-612. PubMed ID: 24628711
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. The rate of manual microscopic examination of urine sediment: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 11,243 urinalysis tests from 88 institutions.
    Tworek JA, Wilkinson DS, Walsh MK.
    Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2008 Dec 01; 132(12):1868-73. PubMed ID: 19061282
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. An Automated Draft Report Generator for Peripheral Blood Smear Examinations Based on Complete Blood Count Parameters.
    Kim YG, Kwon JA, Moon Y, Park SJ, Kim S, Lee HA, Ko SY, Chang EA, Nam MH, Lim CS, Yoon SY.
    Ann Lab Med; 2018 Nov 01; 38(6):512-517. PubMed ID: 30027693
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Automated hematology: where we stand.
    Rappaport ES, Helbert B, Beissner RS, Trowbridge A.
    South Med J; 1988 Mar 01; 81(3):365-70. PubMed ID: 3279533
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39. Clinical consequences of specimen rejection: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes analysis of 78 clinical laboratories.
    Karcher DS, Lehman CM.
    Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2014 Aug 01; 138(8):1003-8. PubMed ID: 25076290
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40. Japanese Society for Laboratory Hematology flow cytometric reference method of determining the differential leukocyte count: external quality assurance using fresh blood samples.
    Kawai Y, Nagai Y, Ogawa E, Kondo H.
    Int J Lab Hematol; 2017 Apr 01; 39(2):202-222. PubMed ID: 28013527
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]


    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 23.