ISO. ISO 15189: Medical laboratories – requirements for quality and competence. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2012.Google Scholar
Padoan A, Sciacovelli L, Aita A, Antonelli G, Plebani M. Measurement uncertainty in laboratory reports: a tool for improving the interpretation of test results. Clin Biochem 2018;57:41–7.CrossrefPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar
Padoan A, Antonelli G, Aita A, Sciacovelli L, Plebani M. An approach for estimating measurement uncertainty in medical laboratories using data from long-term quality control and external quality assessment schemes. Clin Chem Lab Med 2017;55:1696–701.Web of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar
Plebani M, Sciacovelli L, Bernardi D, Aita A, Antonelli G, Padoan A. What information on measurement uncertainty should be communicated to clinicians, and how? Clin Biochem 2018;54:18–22.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar
Oosterhuis WP, Bayat H, Armbruster D, Coşkun A, Freeman KP, Kallner A, et al. The use of error and uncertainty methods in the medical laboratory. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:209–19.Web of ScienceCrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
JCGM 100:2008. Evaluation of measurement data – guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM). Available from: www.bipm.org. Accessed: September 2018.
Bhise V, Rajan SS, Sittig DF, Morgan RO, Chaudhary P, Singh H. Defining and measuring diagnostic uncertainty in medicine: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med 2018;33:103–15.CrossrefPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar
Favaloro EJ, Dorothy MF, Lippi G. Pre-analytical variables in coagulation testing associated with diagnostic errors in hemostasis. Lab Med 2012;43:1–10.Google Scholar
JCGM 200:2012. International vocabulary of metrology – basic and general concepts and associated terms. Available from: www.bipm.org. Accessed: September 2018.
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). GP44-A4: procedures for the handling and processing of blood specimens for common laboratory tests; approved guideline – fourth edition. Wayne, PA, USA: CLSI, 2010.Google Scholar
Magnette A, Chatelain M, Chatelain B, Ten Cate H, Mullier F. Pre-analytical issues in the haemostasis laboratory: guidance for the clinical laboratories. Thromb J 2016;14:49.PubMedWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar
Guder WG. Samples: from the patient to the laboratory: the impact of preanalytical variables on the quality of laboratory results, 3rd ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 2003.Google Scholar
Nikolac N. Lipemia: causes, interference mechanisms, detection and management. Biochem Medica 2014;24:57–67.Google Scholar
Bowen RA, Chan Y, Cohen J, Rehak NN, Hortin GL, Csako G, et al. Effect of blood collection tubes on total triiodothyronine and other laboratory assays. Clin Chem 2005;51:424–33.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sylte MS, Wentzel-Larsen T, Bolann BJ. Estimation of the minimal preanalytical uncertainty for 15 clinical chemistry serum analytes. Clin Chem 2010;56:1329–35.PubMedWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chang CH, Wang YW, Yeh Liu PY, Kao Yang YH. A practical approach to minimize the interaction of dietary vitamin K with warfarin. J Clin Pharm Ther 2014;39:56–60.CrossrefWeb of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar
Vos MJ, Rondeel JM, Mijnhout GS, Endert E. Immunoassay interference caused by heterophilic antibodies interacting with biotin. Clin Chem Lab Med 2017;55:e122–6.Web of ScienceCrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Favaloro EJ. How to generate a more accurate laboratory-based international normalized ratio: solutions to obtaining or verifying the mean normal prothrombin time and international sensitivity index. Semin Thromb Hemost 2019;45:10–21.CrossrefWeb of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar
Kouri T, Siloaho M, Pohjavaara S, Koskinen P, Malminiemi O, Pohja-Nylander P, et al. Pre-analytical factors and measurement uncertainty. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2005;65:463–76.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Jones GR, Hawkins RC. Correcting laboratory results for the effects of interferences: an approach incorporating uncertainty of measurement. Ann Clin Biochem 2015;52:226–31.CrossrefPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar
Farrance I, Badrick T, Frenkel R. Uncertainty in measurement: a review of the procedures for determining uncertainty in measurement and its use in deriving the biological variation of the estimated glomerular filtration rate. Pract Lab Med 2018;12:e00097.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar
About the article
Published Online: 2019-05-23
Published in Print: 2019-09-25
Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.
Research funding: None declared.
Employment or leadership: None declared.
Honorarium: None declared.
Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.