Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,236

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Red blood cell distribution width: A simple parameter with multiple clinical applications

Salvagno, Gian Luca, Sanchis-Gomar, Fabian, Picanza, Alessandra, Lippi, Giuseppe·2015·Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences

Abstract

The red blood cell distribution width (RDW) is a simple and inexpensive parameter, which reflects the degree of heterogeneity of erythrocyte volume (conventionally known as anisocytosis), and is traditionally used in laboratory hematology for differential diagnosis of anemias. Nonetheless, recent evidence attests that anisocytosis is commonplace in human disorders such as cardiovascular disease, venous thromboembolism, cancer, diabetes, community-acquired pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, liver and kidney failure, as well as in other acute or chronic conditions. Despite some demographic and analytical issues related to the routine assessment that may impair its clinical usefulness, an increased RDW has a high negative predictive value for diagnosing a variety of disorders, but also conveys important information for short- and long-term prognosis. Even more importantly, the value of RDW is now being regarded as a strong and independent risk factor for death in the general population. Although it has not been definitely established whether an increased value of RDW is a risk factor or should only be considered an epiphenomenon of an underlying biological and metabolic imbalance, it seems reasonable to suggest that the assessment of this parameter should be broadened far beyond the differential diagnosis of anemias. An increased RDW mirrors a profound deregulation of erythrocyte homeostasis involving both impaired erythropoiesis and abnormal red blood cell survival, which may be attributed to a variety of underlying metabolic abnormalities such as shortening of telomere length, oxidative stress, inflammation, poor nutritional status, dyslipidemia, hypertension, erythrocyte fragmentation and alteration of erythropoietin function. As such, the aim of this article is to provide general information about RDW and its routine assessment, to review the most relevant implications in health and disease and give some insights about its potential clinical applications.

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 · 10.3109/10408363.2014.992064

Cites

7 of 7 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 7 references

Cited by

See all 1,236

Metadata

Authors
Salvagno, G. L., Sanchis-Gomar, F., Picanza, A., & Lippi, G.
Venue
Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences
Published
2014-12-23
Volume
52
Issue
2
Pages
86-105
ISSN
  • 1040-8363 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-781X
OpenAlex
W2025619691
Cited by
1,236
References
7
FWCI
3.93
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: Red blood cell distribution width: A simple parameter with multiple clinical applications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3109/10408363.2014.992064
The paper
Salvagno, G. L., Sanchis-Gomar, F., Picanza, A., & Lippi, G. (2015). Red blood cell distribution width: A simple parameter with multiple clinical applications. Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3109/10408363.2014.992064

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.