Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 662

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry Standards of Laboratory Practice: Recommendations for the Use of Cardiac Markers in Coronary Artery Diseases

Wu, Alan HB, Apple, Fred S, Gibler, W Brian, Jesse, Robert L, Warshaw, Myron M, Valdes, Roland·1999·Clinical Chemistry

Abstract

The Sixth Conference on the “Standards of Laboratory Practice Series”, sponsored by the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (NACB), was held on August 4–5, 1998, at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry, in Chicago, IL. An expert committee was assembled to write recommendations on the use of cardiac markers in coronary artery diseases. The NACB Committee prepared a preliminary draft of the guidelines, made them available on the World Wide Web (www.nacb.org), and distributed them before the presentations. The recommendations were divided into four areas: the use of markers in the triage of patients with chest pain, acute coronary syndromes, clinical applications other than acute myocardial infarction and research, and assay platforms and markers of acute myocardial infarction. The recommendations were revised and subsequently re-presented in part at the “Biomarkers in Acute Cardiac Syndromes Conference”, sponsored by the Jewish Hospital Heart and Lung Institute, Louisville KY, on October 16–17, 1998. This report lists each recommendation, its scientific justification, and a summary of discussions from conference participants and reviewers. Approximately 100 individuals responded to various versions of these recommendations via direct correspondences, telephone calls to Committee members, electronic mail correspondence to the Committee Chairman, or oral questions and comments raised during one of the two conference presentations. Some of the recommendations were changed to reflect the consensus opinion. In cases in which there was no consensus, the Committee included pertinent discussion without necessarily changing the original recommendations. At times, the Committee members felt that although a particular recommendation might not be the current standard of care today, they anticipate that it likely will be adopted in the near future.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/clinchem/45.7.1104

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Cited by

See all 662

Metadata

Authors
Wu, A. H., Apple, F. S., Gibler, W. B., Jesse, R. L., Warshaw, M. M., & Valdes, R.
Venue
Clinical Chemistry
Published
1999-07-01
Volume
45
Issue
7
Pages
1104-1121
ISSN
  • 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8561
OpenAlex
W2167313423
Cited by
662
References
3
FWCI
36.67
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

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.