MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157504701 · doi:10.1136/jclinpath-2013-202130

Comparison of Becton Dickinson Vacutainer rapid serum tube with the serum separator tube for routine chemistry and immunoassay tests

2014· article· en· W2157504701 on OpenAlexaff
Ronald Yan, Amy Lou, Heather Tarr, Hilary Smith, Lois Kinney, Yu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Pathology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Canadian institutionsCapital District Health AuthorityHorizon Health NetworkDalhousie UniversitySaint John Regional HospitalDr. Everett Chalmers Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVacutainerImmunoassayAnalyteChromatographyVacuum tubeChemistryTube (container)MedicineMaterials scienceImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To shorten the clotting time and resolve the delayed clotting or no clotting on specimens from patients on anticoagulant therapy, Becton Dickinson (BD) recently developed the Vacutainer rapid serum tube (RST). The aim of this study was to systematically compare the new RST tube with the widely used serum separator tube (SST) for routine chemistry and immunoassay tests on 3 common analyser platforms. METHODS: Blood from 45 people (24 women and 21 men, age 21-77 years) was collected using the SST and RST tubes in sequence. Sera from both tubes were separated and analysed simultaneously for 54, 50, and 10 chemistry and/or immunoassay tests on the Roche Modular, Abbott Architect, and Siemens Centaur analysers, respectively. RESULTS: The results from the RST tube were comparable with those from the SST tube on most analytes. Although the results for a few analytes showed statistically significant differences between the two tubes (p<0.05), the differences had no clinical significance for most assays. Only for parathyroid hormone on the Abbott Architect, the RST tube demonstrated clinical significant bias versus the SST tube (-15.3%, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The RST tube provides acceptable performance for routine chemistry and immunoassay tests.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.388 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical PathologySame topicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlFrench-language works237,207