The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine?
Abstract
Laboratory testing is a highly complex process and, although laboratory services are relatively safe, they are not as safe as they could or should be. Clinical laboratories have long focused their attention on quality control methods and quality assessment programs dealing with analytical aspects of testing. However, a growing body of evidence accumulated in recent decades demonstrates that quality in clinical laboratories cannot be assured by merely focusing on purely analytical aspects. The more recent surveys on errors in laboratory medicine conclude that in the delivery of laboratory testing, mistakes occur more frequently before (pre-analytical) and after (post-analytical) the test has been performed. Most errors are due to pre-analytical factors (46–68.2% of total errors), while a high error rate (18.5–47% of total errors) has also been found in the post-analytical phase. Errors due to analytical problems have been significantly reduced over time, but there is evidence that, particularly for immunoassays, interference may have a serious impact on patients. A description of the most frequent and risky pre-, intra- and post-analytical errors and advice on practical steps for measuring and reducing the risk of errors is therefore given in the present paper. Many mistakes in the Total Testing Process are called “laboratory errors”, although these may be due to poor communication, action taken by others involved in the testing process (e.g., physicians, nurses and phlebotomists), or poorly designed processes, all of which are beyond the laboratory's control. Likewise, there is evidence that laboratory information is only partially utilized. A recent document from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) recommends a new, broader definition of the term “laboratory error” and a classification of errors according to different criteria. In a modern approach to total quality, centered on patients' needs and satisfaction, the risk of errors and mistakes in pre- and post-examination steps must be minimized to guarantee the total quality of laboratory services.
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
To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System
(2000) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/9728 · Cited by 14,044
Five Years After To Err Is Human: What Have We Learned?
Leape, L. L., & Berwick, D. M. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.19.2384 · Cited by 1,250
(2000) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410605795 · Cited by 915
Bonini, P., Plebani, M., Ceriotti, F., & Rubboli, F. (2002) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1093/clinchem/48.5.691 · Cited by 850
Self-citationMistakes in a stat laboratory: types and frequency
Plebani, M., & Carraro, P. (1997) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1093/clinchem/43.8.1348 · Cited by 572
Self-citationWhy is the laboratory an afterthought for managed care organizations?
Forsman, R. W. (1996) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1093/clinchem/42.5.813 · Cited by 387
Current and Emerging Infectious Risks of Blood Transfusions
Busch, M. P., Kleinman, S. H., & Nemo, G. J. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.8.959 · Cited by 334
Techniques to Improve Physicians' Use of Diagnostic Tests: A New Conceptual Framework
Solomon, D. H., Hashimoto, H., Daltroy, L., & Liang, M. H. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.280.23.2020 · Cited by 321
Improving Patient Safety — Five Years after the IOM Report
Altman, D. E., Clancy, C. M., & Blendon, R. J. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmp048243 · Cited by 233
Errors in Laboratory Medicine: Practical Lessons to Improve Patient Safety
Howanitz, P. J. (2005) · Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine · doi:10.5858/2005-129-1252-eilmpl · Cited by 223
Cited by
A consensus protocol for the standardization of cerebrospinal fluid collection and biobanking
Teunissen, C. E., Petzold, A., Bennett, J. L., Berven, F. S., Brundin, L., Comabella, M., Franciotta, D., Frederiksen, J. L., Fleming, J. O., Furlan, R., et al. (2009) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181c47cc2 · Cited by 845
Cognitive and System Factors Contributing to Diagnostic Errors in Radiology
Lee, C. S., Nagy, P. G., Weaver, S. J., & Newman-Toker, D. E. (2013) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.12.10375 · Cited by 415
del Campo, M., Mollenhauer, B., Bertolotto, A., Engelborghs, S., Hampel, H., Simonsen, A. H., Kapaki, E., Kruse, N., Le Bastard, N., Lehmann, S., et al. (2012) · Biomarkers in Medicine · doi:10.2217/bmm.12.46 · Cited by 343
The Value of In Vitro Diagnostic Testing in Medical Practice: A Status Report
Rohr, U.-P., Binder, C., Dieterle, T., Giusti, F., Messina, C. G. M., Toerien, E., Moch, H., & Schäfer, H. H. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0149856 · Cited by 229
Nikolac, N., Šupak Smolčić, V., Šimundić, A.-M., & Ćelap, I. (2013) · Biochemia Medica · doi:10.11613/bm.2013.031 · Cited by 99
Metadata
- Authors
- Plebani, M.
- Venue
- Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2006-01-01
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 750-9
- ISSN
- 1434-6621 (ISSN-L)
- 1437-4331
- OpenAlex
- W2053682685
- Cited by
- 734
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 14.51
- 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: Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1515/cclm.2006.123
- The paper
- Plebani, M. (2006). Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine? Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM). https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm.2006.123
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.