Selection of Single-Analyte Delta Check Rules with Logistic Regression for Detection of Intravenous Fluid Contamination in a Clinical Chemistry Laboratory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The conventional single-analyte delta check, utilized for identifying intravenous fluid contamination and other preanalytical errors, is known to flag many specimens reflecting true patient status changes. This study aimed to derive delta check rules that more accurately identify contamination. METHODS: Results for calcium, creatinine, glucose, sodium, and potassium were retrieved from 326 103 basic or comprehensive metabolic panels tested between February 2021 and January 2022. In total, 7934 specimens showed substantial result changes, of which 1489 were labeled as either contaminated or non-contaminated based on chart review. These labeled specimens were used to derive logistic regression models and to select the most predictive single-analyte delta checks for 4 common contaminants. Their collective performance was evaluated using a test data set from October 2023 comprising 14 717 specimens. RESULTS: The most predictive single-analyte delta checks included a calcium change by ≤-24% for both saline and Plasma-Lyte A contamination, a potassium increase by ≥3.0 mmol/L for potassium contamination, and a glucose increase by ≥400 mg/dL (22.2 mmol/L) for dextrose contamination. In the training data sets, multi-analyte logistic regression models performed better than single-analyte delta checks. In the test data set, logistic regression models and single-analyte delta checks demonstrated collective alert rates of 0.58% (95% CI, 0.46%-0.71%) and 0.60% (95% CI, 0.49%-0.74%), respectively, along with collective positive predictive values of 79% (95% CI, 70%-89%) and 77% (95% CI, 68%-87%). CONCLUSIONS: Single-analyte delta checks selected by logistic regression demonstrated a low false alert rate.
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".