The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Logical observation identifier names and codes (LOINC) database: a public use set of codes and names for electronic reporting of clinical laboratory test results
Abstract
Many laboratories use electronic message standards to transmit results to their clients. If all laboratories used the same "universal" set of test identifiers, electronic transmission of results would be greatly simplified. The Logical Observation Identifier Names and Codes (LOINC) database aims to be such a code system, covering at least 98% of the average laboratory's tests. The LOINC database should be of interest to hospitals, clinical laboratories, doctors' offices, state health departments, governmental healthcare providers, third-party payors, organizations involved in clinical trials, and quality assurance and utilization reviewers. The fifth release of the LOINC database, containing codes, names, and synonyms for approximately 6300 test observations, is now available on the Internet for public use. Here we describe the LOINC database, the methods used to produce it, and how it may be obtained.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The PhenX Toolkit: get the most from your measures
Hamilton, C. M., Strader, L. C., Pratt, J. G., Maiese, D., Hendershot, T., Kwok, R. K., Hammond, J. A., Huggins, W., Jackman, D., Pan, H., et al. (2011) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwr193 · Cited by 889
A roadmap for national action on clinical decision support
Osheroff, J. A., Teich, J. M., Middleton, B., Steen, E. B., Wright, A., & Detmer, D. E. (2007) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m2334 · Cited by 707
LOINC, a Universal Standard for Identifying Laboratory Observations: A 5-Year Update
McDonald, C. J., Huff, S. M., Suico, J. G., Hill, G., Leavelle, D., Aller, R., Forrey, A., Mercer, K., DeMoor, G., Hook, J., et al. (2003) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/49.4.624 · Cited by 579
Self-citationUsing Electronic Health Records To Generate Phenotypes For Research
Pendergrass, S. A., & Crawford, D. C. (2019) · Current Protocols in Human Genetics · doi:10.1002/cphg.80 · Cited by 120
Practical challenges in integrating genomic data into the electronic health record
Kho, A. N., Rasmussen, L. V., Connolly, J. J., Peissig, P. L., Starren, J., Hakonarson, H., & Hayes, M. G. (2013) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1038/gim.2013.131 · Cited by 108
Metadata
- Authors
- Forrey, A. W., McDonald, C. J., DeMoor, G., Huff, S. M., Leavelle, D., Leland, D., Fiers, T., Charles, L., Griffin, B., Stalling, F., Tullis, A., Hutchins, K., & Baenziger, J.
- Venue
- Clinical Chemistry
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1996-01-01
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 81-90
- ISSN
- 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8561
- OpenAlex
- W2122087674
- Cited by
- 276
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Logical observation identifier names and codes (LOINC) database: a public use set of codes and names for electronic reporting of clinical laboratory test results. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/clinchem/42.1.81
- The paper
- Forrey, A. W., McDonald, C. J., DeMoor, G., Huff, S. M., Leavelle, D., Leland, D., Fiers, T., Charles, L., Griffin, B., Stalling, F., Tullis, A., Hutchins, K., & Baenziger, J. (1996). Logical observation identifier names and codes (LOINC) database: a public use set of codes and names for electronic reporting of clinical laboratory test results. Clinical Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/42.1.81
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
