Cited by 21Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlScientific Measurement and Uncertainty EvaluationReliability and Agreement in Measurement

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Use of Reference Change Values in Clinical Laboratories

Bugdayci, Guler, Oguzman, Hamdi, Arattan, Havva, Sasmaz, Guler·2015·Clinical Laboratory

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The use of Reference Change Values (RCV) has been advocated as very useful for monitoring individuals. Most of these are performed for monitoring individuals in acute situations and for following up the improvement or deterioration of chronic diseases. In our study, we aimed at evaluating the RCV calculation for 24 clinical chemistry analytes widely used in clinical laboratories and the utilization of this data. METHODS: Twenty-four serum samples were analyzed with Abbott kits (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL, USA), manufactured for use with the Architect c8000 (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL, USA) auto-analyzer. We calculated RCV using the following formula: RCV = Z x 2 1/2x (CVA2 + CVw2)1/2. Four reference change values (RCV) were calculated for each analyte using four statistical probabilities (0.95, and 0.99, unidirectional and bidirectional). Moreover, by providing an interval after identifying upper and lower limits with the Reference Change Factor (RCF), serially measured tests were calculated by using two formulas: exp (Z x 2 1/2 x (CV(A)2 + CVw2)½/100) for RCF(UP) and (1/RCF(UP)) for RCF(DOWN). RESULTS: RCVs of these analytes were calculated as 14.63% for glucose, 29.88% for urea, 17.75% for ALP, 53.39% for CK, 46.98% for CK-MB, 21.00% amylase, 8.00% for total protein, 8.70% for albumin, 51.08% for total bilirubin, 86.34% for direct bilirubin, 6.40% for calcium, 15.03% for creatinine, 21.47% for urate, 14.19% for total cholesterol, 46.62% for triglyceride, 20.51% for HDL-cholesterol, 29.59% for AST, 46.31% for ALT, 31.54% for GGT, 20.92% for LDH, 19.75% for inorganic phosphate, 3.05% for sodium, 11.75% for potassium, 4.44% for chloride (RCV, p < 0.05, unidirectionally). CONCLUSIONS: We suggest using RCV as well as using population-based reference intervals in clinical laboratories. RCV could be available as a tool for making clinical decision, especially when monitoring individuals.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7754/clin.lab.2014.140906

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 21

Metadata

Authors
Bugdayci, G., Oguzman, H., Arattan, H., & Sasmaz, G.
Venue
Clinical Laboratory
Published
2015
Volume
61
Issue
03+04/2015
Pages
251-7
ISSN
1433-6510 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2337868668
Cited by
21
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2
FWCI
1.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Laboratory (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University AVESIS (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Medical Laboratory Technology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Instrumentation › Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
Keywords
reference change value, clinical chemistry analytes, coefficient of variation, reference values, clinical laboratory quality control, patient monitoring, creatine kinase, creatine kinase-MB, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyl transferase, lipoproteins, electrolytes, bilirubin, uric acid, creatinine
MeSH terms
Blood Chemical Analysis, Chemistry, Clinical, Humans, Probability, Reference Values, Reproducibility of Results, Models, Statistical, Biomarkers, Clinical Laboratory Techniques, Serum, Healthy Volunteers

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