Transformation of Sequential Hospital and Outpatient Laboratory Data into Between-Day Reference Change Values
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Serial differences between intrapatient consecutive measurements can be transformed into Taylor series of variation vs time with the intersection at time = 0 (y0) equal to the total variation (analytical + biological + preanalytical). With small preanalytical variation, y0, expressed as a percentage of the mean, is equal to the variable component of the reference change value (RCV) calculation: (CVA2 + CVI2)1/2. METHODS: We determined the between-day RCV of patient data for 17 analytes and compared them to healthy participants' RCVs. We analyzed 653 consecutive days of Dartmouth-Hitchcock Roche Modular general chemistry data (4.2 million results: 60% inpatient, 40% outpatient). The serial patient values of 17 analytes were transformed into 95% 2-sided RCV (RCVAlternate), and 3 sets of RCVhealthy were calculated from 3 Roche Modular analyzers' quality control summaries and CVI derived from biological variation (BV) studies using healthy participants. RESULTS: The RCVAlternate values are similar to RCVhealthy derived from known components of variation. For sodium, chloride, bicarbonate calcium, magnesium, phosphate, alanine aminotransferase, albumin, and total protein, the RCVs are equivalent. As expected, increased variation was found for glucose, aspartate aminotransferase, creatinine, and potassium. Direct bilirubin and urea demonstrated lower variation. CONCLUSIONS: Our RCVAlternate values integrate known and unknown components of analytic, biologic, and preanalytic variation, and depict the variations observed by clinical teams that make medical decisions based on the test values. The RCVAlternate values are similar to the RCVhealthy values derived from known components of variation and suggest further studies to better understand the results being generated on actual patients tested in typical laboratory environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".