MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7093898375

Pediatric Reference Intervals for Biochemical Markers: Gaps and Challenges, Recent National Initiatives and Future Perspectives

2017· article· en· W7093898375 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed Central · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReference valuesMEDLINEMandateTest (biology)Confidence intervalHealth careMedical literatureReference dataBiobankQuality (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reference intervals provide valuable information to medical practitioners in their interpretation of quantitative laboratory test results, and are critical in the assessment of patient health and in clinical decision-making. The reference interval serves as a health-associated benchmark with which to compare an individual test result. While the concept of reference intervals and their utility appear straightforward, the process of establishing accurate and reliable reference intervals is considerably complex and involved. Currently, many pediatric laboratory tests are inappropriately interpreted using reference intervals derived from either adult populations, hospitalized pediatric populations, or from outdated and/or inaccurate technology. Thus, many pediatric reference intervals used in diagnostic laboratories are incomplete and may be inappropriate for clinical use. The use of inappropriate reference intervals impacts clinical decision-making and has potential detrimental effects on the quality of patient healthcare including misdiagnosis, delayed diagnosis, inappropriate treatments, and patient risk. These are critical gaps in pediatric healthcare and it is imperative to update and establish appropriate reference intervals for pediatric populations based on specific age- and sex-stratifications. In the present review, specific issues, challenges and deficiencies in pediatric reference intervals for biochemical markers will be discussed. Early studies using hospitalized patients will be examined, followed by a review of recent national and global initiatives on establishing reference intervals from healthy pediatric population. We will highlight the achievements and milestones of the Canadian CALIPER project, including the establishment of a comprehensive biobank and database which has addressed several of these critical gaps. CALIPER’s mandate is to establish and provide comprehensive, up-to-date pediatric reference intervals to all biochemical markers of pediatric disease. CALIPER has also begun knowledge translation initiatives to disseminate its data via peer-reviewed publication, an online database, and a smartphone application to allow greater access to CALIPER pediatric reference interval data. Finally, limitations, future perspectives and harmonization of pediatric reference intervals to improve pediatric diagnostics in Canada and worldwide will be discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed CentralSame topicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlFrench-language works237,207