Clinical chemistry reference values for 75-year-old apparently healthy persons

Huber, Klaus; Mostafaie, Nazanin; Stangl, G.; Worofka, Brigitte; Kittl, Eva Maria; Hofmann, Jörg; Hejtman, Milos; Michael, Rainer; Weissgram, Silvia; Leitha, Thomas; Jungwirth, Susanne; Fischer, Peter; Tragl, Karl-Heinz; Bauer, Katrin

doi:10.1515/cclm.2006.247

Cited by 20 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fourteen studies [14,19,21,22,30,32,33,35,[37][38][39][40][41][42] implemented the rankbased non-parametric approach recommended by the CLSI although only six [14,30,32,38,40,42] of these studies abided by the minimum requirement of 120 subjects per partition. Six [14,22,30,32,39,40] of the 14 studies also provided confidence intervals for their lower and upper limit estimates.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies reported RIs using more than one method [25,46,48,51,52,58]. Only four [22,25,57,59] of the 26 studies provided confidence intervals for their estimates.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twenty-six articles of the included articles were published in or after 2008, when the most recent CLSI guideline was published, however, only three of those used statistical methods that abide by the CLSI criteria. More importantly, only eight studies (12.5%) from all that were included were found to have reported statistically valid RIs that follow current CLSI criteria [14,22,25,30,32,40,57,59]. Studies were classified as satisfying CLSI criteria if they explicitly stated the type of method used, applied parametric or non-parametric The non-parametric method refers to the rank-based procedure described by CLSI.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A prime example of application of the CLSI guideline was the study by Huber et al [22]. In addition to following the CLSI guideline as defined above this study also removed outliers and tested for significant differences between sex partitions using the Lahti method, collapsing those that were not significant.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Statistical methods used in the calculation of geriatric reference intervals: a systematic review

Arseneau

Balion²

2016

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Geriatric reference intervals (RIs) are not commonly available and are rarely used. It is difficult to select a reference population from a cohort with a high degree of morbidity. Also important are the statistical approaches used to determine health-associated reference values. It is the aim of this study to examine the statistical methods used in the calculation of geriatric RIs. Methods: A search was conducted on EMBASE and Medline for articles between January 1989 and January 2014. Studies were selected if they: 1) were English primary articles; 2) performed a clinical chemistry test on a blood fraction; 3) had a population sub-group consisting of individuals ≥ 65 years of age; and 4) calculated a RI for the subgroup ≥ 65 years of age. Results: There were 64 articles identified, of which 78.1% described the RI calculation method used. RI calculation was performed by non-parametric (21.9%), parametric (42.2%), robust (3.1%), or other (17.2%) methods. Outlier detection (SD, Grubb's test, Tukey's fence, Dixon) was infrequently used and although most studies performed partitioning, only 57.8% tested the statistical significance of the partitions. Few studies (17.2%) reported confidence intervals for the RI estimates. Overall, only 14.1% of studies provided RI estimates which followed the CLSI guideline EP28-A3c. Conclusions: Statistical methods for RI calculation and partitioning varied considerably between studies and

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies reported RIs using more than one method [25,46,48,51,52,58]. Only four [22,25,57,59] of the 26 studies provided confidence intervals for their estimates.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Statistical methods used in the calculation of geriatric reference intervals: a systematic review

Arseneau

Balion²

2016

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, "elderly" is taken to mean over 65 years of age, thus, the inclusion criterium of in good agreement with their reference values [8,[10][11][12][13].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%