Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Selecting clinically relevant populations for reference intervals.

Robert F Ritchie1, Glenn Palomaki

  • 1Foundation for Blood Research, Scarborough, Maine, USA. ritchie@fbr.org

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
|August 26, 2004
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Snoring and markers of fetal and placental wellbeing.

Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry·2018
Same author

Offering Prenatal Screening in the Age of Genomic Medicine: A Practical Guide.

Journal of women's health (2002)·2017
Same author

Further insights into implications of undetectable or very low unconjugated estriol in maternal serum during the second trimester.

Prenatal diagnosis·2011
Same author

Identifying Lynch syndrome.

International journal of cancer·2009
Same author

Patient hydration: a major source of laboratory uncertainty.

Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine·2007
Same author

Serologic associations of anti-cytoplasmic antibodies identified during anti-nuclear antibody testing.

Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine·2006
Same journal

Artificial general intelligence and the clinical laboratory: a paradigm shift toward Lab 2.0.

Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine·2026
Same journal

Addressing property and unit discordance in laboratory interoperability: the role of NPU as a governance layer.

Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine·2026
Same journal

Ethical evaluation of reflex and reflective testing in conformity with ISO 15189:2022 at the value-based laboratory medicine era.

Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine·2026
Same journal

Emerging blood-based diagnostic strategies for tuberculosis.

Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine·2026
Same journal

Homocitrulline and 3-year mortality in older hospitalised adults: an exploratory study.

Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine·2026
Same journal

Impact of age partitioning on classification discordance in pediatric ferritin reference intervals.

Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine·2026
See all related articles

Selecting appropriate patient groups for reference intervals is crucial for accurate clinical interpretation. Current methods often fail, leading to misdiagnosis and wasted resources in laboratory testing.

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Pathology
  • Medical Diagnostics
  • Biostatistics

Background:

  • Reference intervals are vital for clinical diagnostic triage.
  • Current reference interval criteria do not accurately reflect the health status of the majority of patients seeking care, who often present with non-life-threatening conditions.
  • The distinction between statistical normality and clinical normality is often blurred, leading to misinterpretation of laboratory data.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To highlight the inadequacy of current reference interval selection criteria for clinical utility.
  • To advocate for reference intervals that aid in disease exclusion rather than defining a narrow statistical normality.
  • To re-evaluate the focus on laboratory precision versus the clinical significance of reference intervals.

Main Methods:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Conceptual analysis of reference interval application in clinical practice.
  • Critique of the prevailing approach to laboratory performance improvement.
  • Examination of the discrepancy between statistical and clinical interpretations of 'normal'.

Main Results:

  • The selection of reference cohorts often fails to represent the typical patient population, hindering diagnostic accuracy.
  • Increased laboratory precision has not proportionally improved the clinical utility of reference intervals.
  • Significant financial resources are allocated to laboratory improvements without a clear understanding of their impact on clinical decision-making.

Conclusions:

  • A paradigm shift is needed in how reference intervals are established and interpreted to align with clinical realities.
  • Laboratories, regulators, and professional bodies must collaborate to create sustainable systems for delivering clinically relevant and affordable laboratory information.
  • The focus should be on providing usable data for patient care rather than solely on statistical definitions of normality.