Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Journal of Laboratory Medicine

Official Journal of the German Society of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine

Editor-in-Chief: Schuff-Werner, Peter

Ed. by Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz / Bidlingmaier, Martin / Bietenbeck, Andreas / Conrad, Karsten / Findeisen, Peter / Fraunberger, Peter / Ghebremedhin, Beniam / Holdenrieder, Stefan / Kiehntopf, Michael / Klein, Hanns-Georg / Kohse, Klaus P. / Kratzsch, Jürgen / Luppa, Peter B. / Meyer, Alexander von / Nebe, Carl Thomas / Orth, Matthias / Röhrig-Herzog, Gabriele / Sack, Ulrich / Steimer, Werner / Weber, Thomas / Wieland, Eberhard / Winter, Christoph / Zettl, Uwe K.


IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.389

CiteScore 2018: 0.22

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.156
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.089

Online
ISSN
2567-9449
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 41, Issue 2

Issues

Quantity quotient reporting versus z-value for standardizing quantitative laboratory results

Ergebnisquotient versus z-Wert zur Standardisierung quantitativer Laborergebnisse

Rainer Haeckel
  • Corresponding author
  • Bremer Zentrum für Laboratoriumsmedizin, Klinikum Bremen Mitte, 28305 Bremen, Germany, Phone: +49 412 273448
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Werner Wosniok / Eberhard Gurr / Theo Postma / Thomas Streichert /
Published Online: 2017-04-10 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/labmed-2017-0007

An erratum for this article can be found here: https://doi.org/10.1515/labmed-2017-0131

Abstract:

The rapid increase to digitalize whatever is possible in human lives will lead to electronic storage of medical data probably during the whole life of most individuals. This requires standardization and condensation of an enormous amount of data. Most laboratory data are already reported in digitalized form, but they are far from being sufficiently standardized. Several attempts for standardization have been suggested. The most common standardizing approach is the z-transformation of laboratory data. It is proposed to modify the z-value to a quantity quotient in analogy to the intelligence quotient well known even to laymen.

Zusammenfassung:

Die rasch zunehmende Digitalisierung des menschlichen Lebens, wo immer es möglich ist, wird zur elektronischen Speicherung medizinischer Daten während des ganzen Lebens der meisten Individuen führen. Das erfordert die Standardisierung und Kondensation enormer Datenmengen. Die meisten Daten aus Laboratorien werden bereits in digitalisierter Form bereit gestellt, sind allerdings noch weit von einer Standardisierung entfernt. Verschiedene Versuche wurden bereits vorgeschlagen, beispielsweise die z-Transformation. Der z-Wert kann als Ergebnis-Quotient modifiziert werden, in Analogie zu dem als Laien bekannten Intelligenz-Quotienten.

Reviewed publication

Wieland E. Redaktion

Keywords: biological variation; report standardizing; z-transformation

Schlüsselwörter: biologische Variation; Ergebnisquotient; z-Transformation

References

  • 1.

    Dybkaer R, Solberg HE. Approved recommendation on the theory of reference values. Part 6. Presentation of observed values related to reference values. Clin Chim Acta 1987;170:S33–43.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 2.

    Grasbeck R, Fellman J. Normal values and statistics. Scand J Lab Invest 1968;21:193–5.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 3.

    Gullick HD, Schauble MK. SD unit system for standardized reporting and interpretation of laboratory data. Am J Clin Pathol 1972;57:517–25.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 4.

    Rushmer RF. Accentuate the positive. A display system for clinical laboratory data. J Am Med Assoc 1968;206:836–8.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 5.

    Bold AM. Clinical chemistry reporting. Problems and proposals. Lancet 1976;1:951–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 6.

    Mayer M, Chou D, Eytan T. Unit-independent reporting of laboratory test results. Clin Chem Lab Med 2001;39:50–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 7.

    Haeckel R, Wosniok W, Gurr E, Peil B. Permissible limits for uncertainty of measurement in laboratory medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:1161–70.Web of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 8.

    Hoffmann G, Klawonn F, Lichtinghagen R, Orth M. Der zlog-Wert als Basis für die Standardisierung von Laborwerten. J Lab Med 2017;41:23–32.Google Scholar

  • 9.

    Haeckel R, Wosniok W. Quantity quotient reporting. A proposal for a standardized presentation of laboratory results. Clin Chem Lab Med 2009;47:1203–6.PubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • 10.

    Haeckel R, Wosniok W, Hoffmann G. Standardisation of laboratory results: quotient Reporting. J Lab Med 2010;34:95–8.Google Scholar

  • 11.

    Haeckel R, Wosniok W, Postma T. Quantity quotient reporting. Comparison of various models. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:1921–6.Web of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 12.

    Haeckel R, Wosniok W. Observed unknown distribution of clinical chemical quantities should be considered to be log-normal. A proposal. Clin Chem Lab Med 2010;48:1393–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 13.

    Steven SS. On the theory of scales of measurement. Science 1946;103:677–80.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 14.

    Lo JS, Kellen JA. A proposal for a more uniform output in laboratory data. Clin Chim Acta 1972;41:239–45.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

About the article

Received: 2017-01-19

Accepted: 2017-03-15

Published Online: 2017-04-10

Published in Print: 2017-04-25


Citation Information: LaboratoriumsMedizin, Volume 41, Issue 2, Pages 93–97, ISSN (Online) 1439-0477, ISSN (Print) 0342-3026, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/labmed-2017-0007.

Export Citation

©2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in