Interpreting clinical and laboratory tests: importance and implications of context

Alan N. Charney
  • Corresponding author
  • Clinical Professor, Department of Internal Medicine, NYU Langone Health, Division of Nephrology, 550 1st Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA, 47 Laura Lane, Morristown, NJ 07960, USA
  • Email
  • Search for other articles:
  • degruyter.comGoogle Scholar
and Jordan T. Dourmashkin

Abstract

Clinical and laboratory tests in clinical medicine include a range of measurements that may be categorized as “normal range” tests, positive or negative tests, or contextual tests. Normal range test results are quantitative and are compared to a reference interval or range provided by the laboratory. Positive or negative tests are also quantitative tests and characteristically have a cutoff value that specifies the result. Contextual tests require a context, a physiological condition, to correctly interpret the result. A closer examination of reference intervals suggests that these also are contextual. The fact that there is a range of apparently normal values indicates the presence of cultural, biological, physiological and behavioral diversity in the population sampled to determine normality. As such, the reference interval describes the population from which it was determined and may have utility in this regard.

  • 1.

    McPherson RA, Pincus MR, editors. Henry’s clinical diagnosis and management by laboratory methods, 23rd ed. St. Louis: Elsevier, 2017.

  • 2.

    Cebal RD, Beck JR. Biochemical profiles. Ann Intern Med 1987;106:403–13.

  • 3.

    Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW, Fletcher GS, editors. Clinical epidemiology, 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins, 2014.

  • 4.

    Denic A, Glassock RJ, Rule AD. Structural and functional changes with the aging kidney. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 2016;23:19–28.

  • 5.

    Banker A, Bell C, Gupta-Malhotra M, Samuels J. Blood pressure percentile charts to identify high or low blood pressure in children. BMC Pediatr 2016;16:98.

  • 6.

    Larsson A, Palm M, Hansson LO, Axelsson O. Reference values for clinical chemistry tests during normal pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2008;115:874–81.

  • 7.

    Ehrenkranz JL. Home and point-of-care pregnancy tests: a review of the technology. Epidemiology 2002;13:S15–8.

  • 8.

    Shulman ST, Bisno AL, Clegg HW, Gerber MA, Kaplan EL, Lee G, et al. Clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of group a streptococcal pharyngitis: 2012 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2012;55:e86–102.

  • 9.

    Nerenz RD, Gronowski AM. Qualitative point of care human chorionic gonadotropin testing: can we diffuse this ticking time bomb? Clin Chem 2015;61:483–6.

  • 10.

    Cook JD, Strauss KA, Caplan YH, Lodico CP, Bush DM. Urine pH: the effects of time and temperature after collection. J Anal Toxicol 2007;31:486–96.

  • 11.

    Soriano JR. Renal tubular acidosis: the clinical entity. J Am Soc Nephrol 2002;13:2160–70.

  • 12.

    Schrier RW. Diagnostic value of urinary sodium, chloride, urea, and flow. J Am Soc Nephrol 2011;22:1610–3.

  • 13.

    Galla JH. Metabolic alkalosis. J Am Soc Nephrol 2000;2:369–75.

  • 14.

    Braun MM, Barstow CH, Pyzocha NA. Diagnosis and management of sodium disorders: hyponatremia and hypernatremia. Am Fam Physician 2015;91:299–307.

  • 15.

    Makaryus AN, McFarlane SI. Diabetes insipidus: diagnosis and treatment of a complex disease. Cleve Clinic J Med 2006;73:65–71.

  • 16.

    American Diabetes Association. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes. Diabetes Care 2017;40(Suppl 1):S11–24.

  • 17.

    Ozarda Y, Ichihara K, Bakan E, Polat H, Ozturk N, Baygutalp NK, et al. A nationwide multicentre study in Turkey for establishing reference intervals of haematological parameters with novel use of a panel of whole blood. Biochem Med 2017;27:350–77.

  • 18.

    Guelinckx I, Ferreira-Pêgo C, Moreno LA, Kavouras SA, Gandy J, Martinez H, et al. Intake of water and different beverages in adults across 13 countries. Eur J Nutr 2015;54(Suppl 2):S45–55.

  • 19.

    Kraut JA, Madias NE. Re-evaluation of the normal range of serum total CO2 concentration. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2018;13:343–7.

Purchase article
Get instant unlimited access to the article.
$42.00
Price including VAT
Log in
Already have access? Please log in.


Journal + Issues

Diagnosis aims at answering the question how diagnosis determines the quality of medical care. It focuses on how diagnosis can be advanced, how it is taught, and how and why it can fail, leading to diagnostic errors. The journal welcomes both fundamental and applied works, improvement initiatives, opinions, and debates to encourage new thinking on improving this critical aspect of healthcare quality.

Search