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
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.
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
Cites
The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States
McGlynn, E. A., Asch, S. M., Adams, J., Keesey, J., Hicks, J., DeCristofaro, A., & Kerr, E. A. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa022615 · Cited by 5,079
Bonini, P., Plebani, M., Ceriotti, F., & Rubboli, F. (2002) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1093/clinchem/48.5.691 · Cited by 850
Self-citationInfluence of hemolysis on routine clinical chemistry testing
Lippi, G., Luca Salvagno, G., Montagnana, M., Brocco, G., & Cesare Guidi, G. (2006) · Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) · doi:10.1515/cclm.2006.054 · Cited by 344
Self-citationOptical sensor systems for bioprocess monitoring
Ulber, R., Frerichs, J.-G., & Beutel, S. (2003) · Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry · doi:10.1007/s00216-003-1930-1 · Cited by 151
Short-term venous stasis influences routine coagulation testing
Lippi, G., Salvagno, G. L., Montagnana, M., & Guidi, G. C. (2005) · Blood Coagulation & Fibrinolysis · doi:10.1097/01.mbc.0000178828.59866.03 · Cited by 66
Self-citation
Cited by
Problems with measuring peripheral oxytocin: can the data on oxytocin and human behavior be trusted?
McCullough, M. E., Churchland, P. S., & Mendez, A. J. (2013) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.04.018 · Cited by 416
Preanalytical sample handling recommendations for Alzheimer's disease plasma biomarkers
Rózga, M., Bittner, T., Batrla, R., & Karl, J. (2019) · Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring · doi:10.1016/j.dadm.2019.02.002 · Cited by 99
Does POCT reduce the risk of error in laboratory testing?
Plebani, M. (2009) · Clinica Chimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.cca.2009.03.014 · Cited by 97
Self-citationPhlebotomy, a bridge between laboratory and patient
Ialongo, C., & Bernardini, S. (2016) · Biochemia Medica · doi:10.11613/bm.2016.002 · Cited by 97
Simundic, A.-M., Cornes, M., Grankvist, K., Lippi, G., Nybo, M., Kovalevskaya, S., Sprongl, L., Sumarac, Z., & Church, S. (2013) · Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) · doi:10.1515/cclm-2013-0283 · Cited by 84
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Lippi, G., Guidi, G. C., Mattiuzzi, C., & Plebani, M.
- Venue
- Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- 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.