Back

Validation of the international consensus group criteria for slide review following automated complete blood count at Jimma Medical Center, Ethiopia

Kiya, G. T.; Getachew, A.; Asaye, S.; Gebre, D.; Demeke, N.; Yemane, T.

2022-11-01 hematology
10.1101/2022.10.26.22281576 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe international consensus group suggested criteria for action following automated complete blood count and white blood cell differential analysis. These criteria were set based on data from laboratories of developed countries. It is highly important to validate the criteria in developing countries where infectious diseases are still rampant that can affect blood cell count and morphology. Thus, this study was aimed to validate the consensus group criteria for slide review at Jimma Medical Center, Ethiopia from February 1 to May 30, 2020. MethodThe study comprised a total of 1685 patient samples from the daily laboratory workload of CBC analysis. The samples were collected in K2-EDTA tubes (Becton Dickinson) and analyzed using Coulter DxH 800 and Sysmex XT-1880 hematology analyzers. Slide review was done on two Wright-stained slides for each sample. All statistical analysis were performed using SPSS version 20 software. ResultThere were 39.8% positive findings, majority of which were related to red blood cells. The false negative and false positive rates for Sysmex and Coulter analyzer were 2.4% vs. 4.8%; and 4.6% vs. 4.7%, respectively. The false negative rate was unacceptably higher when we used physicians triggered slide review, which was 17.3% and 17.9% for Sysmex and Coulter analyzer, respectively. ConclusionGenerally, the consensus group rules are suitable to use in our setting. However, we might still need to modify the rules, particularly to reduce the review rates. It is also necessary to confirm the rules with case mixes proportionally derived from the source population.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 4%
24.6%
2
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.0%
3
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
5.3%
4
Tropical Medicine & International Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.7%
5
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.7%
50% of probability mass above
6
Transactions of The Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.5%
7
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.3%
8
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.4%
9
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.0%
10
Public Health in Practice
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
11
British Journal of Haematology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
12
Annals of Translational Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.6%
13
Vaccines
196 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
14
Cytometry Part A
30 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
15
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
16
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
17
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 68%
1.0%
18
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
98 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
19
BioMed Research International
25 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
20
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
21
Physiological Reports
35 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
22
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 23%
0.8%
23
Biomedicines
66 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
24
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
25
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health
10 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
26
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
27
Journal of Proteome Research
215 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
28
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.5%