Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 7, 2026

International Expert Consensus and Recommendations for Neonatal Pneumothorax Ultrasound Diagnosis and Ultrasound-guided Thoracentesis Procedure
05:50

International Expert Consensus and Recommendations for Neonatal Pneumothorax Ultrasound Diagnosis and Ultrasound-guided Thoracentesis Procedure

Published on: March 12, 2020

14.7K

Effectiveness of the International Consensus Group criteria for manual peripheral smear review

Katyayani Palur1, Surekha U Arakeri1

  • 1Department of Pathology, BLDEU's Shri BM Patil Medical College, Vijayapura, Karnataka, India.

Indian Journal of Pathology & Microbiology
|July 14, 2018
PubMed

Insights

The International Consensus Group for Hematology Review (ICGHR) criteria significantly reduced manual peripheral smear reviews compared to laboratory-specific criteria. These ICGHR criteria show promise for clinical adoption after local validation.

Area of Science:

  • Hematology
  • Clinical Pathology
  • Laboratory Medicine

Background:

  • Automated hematology analyzers (AHAs) are essential in clinical labs, but manual peripheral smear reviews (MSR) remain crucial for detecting morphological abnormalities.
  • The International Consensus Group for Hematology Review (ICGHR) developed criteria to decrease the need for MSR after AHA analysis.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the effectiveness of ICGHR criteria against in-house laboratory criteria for MSR using the Sysmex XN-1000.
  • To compare the performance metrics of both sets of criteria in a clinical laboratory setting.

Main Methods:

  • A prospective cross-sectional study compared ICGHR and laboratory criteria for MSR.
  • 860 whole blood samples were analyzed over 19 months.
  • Truth tables and tests of proportion were used to compare performance specifications.

Main Results:

  • ICGHR criteria yielded 81.58% sensitivity, 84.61% specificity, and reduced the MSR rate to 47.56% with 83.14% efficiency.
  • Laboratory criteria showed higher sensitivity (98.80%) but lower specificity (41.40%), with a higher MSR rate of 78.14% and 69.30% efficiency.

Conclusions:

  • The ICGHR criteria significantly decrease manual smear review rates compared to traditional laboratory criteria.
  • ICGHR criteria are adaptable for daily practice but require initial optimization and local validation.
Abstract

Keywords:
Automated hematology analyzersInternational Consensus Group for Hematology Review criteria (ICGHR)manual peripheral smear review

More Related Videos

Prehospital Thrombolysis: A Manual from Berlin05:52

Prehospital Thrombolysis: A Manual from Berlin

Published on: November 26, 2013

22.4K
Protocol and Guidelines for Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound in Diagnosing Neonatal Pulmonary Diseases Based on International Expert Consensus06:15

Protocol and Guidelines for Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound in Diagnosing Neonatal Pulmonary Diseases Based on International Expert Consensus

Published on: March 6, 2019

52.1K

Related Concept Videos

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II01:28

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II

The Bradford Hill criteria serve as guidelines for establishing causative links in epidemiological research. Beyond Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality, key criteria also include Biological Gradient, Plausibility, Coherence, Experiment, and Analogy. These principles assist scientists in assessing the likelihood of causation in complex biological contexts. Below is a summary of these concepts:
1.3K
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I01:30

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I

The Bradford Hill criteria are a group of principles that provide a framework to determine a causal relationship between a specific factor and a disease. There are nine criteria that are pivotal in assessing causality in epidemiological studies. Here's a closer look at Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality criteria with definitions and examples:
1.1K
Chemical Shift: Internal References and Solvent Effects01:17

Chemical Shift: Internal References and Solvent Effects

In an NMR sample, precise measurement of the absolute absorption frequencies of nuclei is difficult. A standard internal reference compound is added, and the frequency difference between the reference signal and sample signals is measured.
The internal reference compound generally used in NMR spectroscopy is tetramethylsilane (TMS). TMS is preferred because it is chemically inert, soluble in NMR solvents, and easily removable. Also, the highly shielded methyl protons in TMS yield an intense...
1.4K
Internal Receptors01:31

Internal Receptors

Many cellular signals are hydrophilic and therefore cannot pass through the plasma membrane. However, small or hydrophobic signaling molecules can cross the hydrophobic core of the plasma membrane and bind to internal, or intracellular, receptors that reside within the cell. Many mammalian steroid hormones use this mechanism of cell signaling, as does nitric oxide (NO) gas.
74.7K
Review and Preview01:10

Review and Preview

In statistics, several tools are used to interpret the data. Measures of central tendency represent the characteristics of the data, such as mean, median, and mode. Additionally, measures of variance like standard deviation and range are used to find the spread of data from the mean. Relative standing measures the distance between data locations. Commonly used measures of relative standings are percentile, z score, and quartiles.
Percentiles are a type of fractile that partition data into...
8.4K
Review and Preview01:13

Review and Preview

Data are individual items of information obtained from a population or sample. Data may be classified as qualitative (categorical), quantitative continuous, or quantitative discrete. Because it is not practical to measure the entire population in a study, researchers use samples to represent the population. A random sample is a representative group from the population chosen by using a method that gives each individual in the population an equal chance of being included in the sample. Random...
11.5K