Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 415

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Preanalytical variability: the dark side of the moon in laboratory testing

Lippi, Giuseppe, Guidi, Gian Cesare, Mattiuzzi, Camilla, Plebani, Mario·2006·Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Abstract

Remarkable advances in instrument technology, automation and computer science have greatly simplified many aspects of previously tedious tasks in laboratory diagnostics, creating a greater volume of routine work, and significantly improving the quality of results of laboratory testing. Following the development and successful implementation of high-quality analytical standards, analytical errors are no longer the main factor influencing the reliability and clinical utilization of laboratory diagnostics. Therefore, additional sources of variation in the entire laboratory testing process should become the focus for further and necessary quality improvements. Errors occurring within the extra-analytical phases are still the prevailing source of concern. Accordingly, lack of standardized procedures for sample collection, including patient preparation, specimen acquisition, handling and storage, account for up to 93% of the errors currently encountered within the entire diagnostic process. The profound awareness that complete elimination of laboratory testing errors is unrealistic, especially those relating to extra-analytical phases that are harder to control, highlights the importance of good laboratory practice and compliance with the new accreditation standards, which encompass the adoption of suitable strategies for error prevention, tracking and reduction, including process redesign, the use of extra-analytical specifications and improved communication among caregivers.

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 · 10.1515/cclm.2006.073

Cites

5 of 5 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

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 415

Metadata

Authors
Lippi, G., Guidi, G. C., Mattiuzzi, C., & Plebani, M.
Venue
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
Published
2006-01-01
Volume
44
Issue
4
Pages
358-65
ISSN
  • 1434-6621 (ISSN-L)
  • 1437-4331
OpenAlex
W2063733792
Cited by
415
References
5
FWCI
13.33
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: Preanalytical variability: the dark side of the moon in laboratory testing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1515/cclm.2006.073
The paper
Lippi, G., Guidi, G. C., Mattiuzzi, C., & Plebani, M. (2006). Preanalytical variability: the dark side of the moon in laboratory testing. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM). https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm.2006.073

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.