An appeal to medical journal editors: The need for a full description of laboratory methods and specimen handling in clinical study reports. Statement by the consortium of laboratory medicine journal editors

Annals of Clinical Biochemistry

Volumn 49, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 105-107

  Rifai, Nader ^a   Annesley, Thomas M ^a   Berg, Jens P ^b   Brugnara, Carlo ^c   Delvin, Edgard ^c   Lamb, Edmund J ^c   Ness, Paul M ^c   Plebani, Mario ^d   Wick, Mark R ^c   Wu, Alan ^e   Delanghe, Joris ^e  

^a Clinical Chemistry   (United States)

^b Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation   (United States)

^c American Journal of Hematology ^*  (United States)

^d Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine   (United States)

^e Clinica Chimica Acta   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; BRAIN NATRIURETIC PEPTIDE; C REACTIVE PROTEIN; FIBRINOGEN; PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; THYROTROPIN; TROPONIN; TROPONIN I; TROPONIN T;

ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME; ANALYTIC METHOD; ASSAY; BIOPSY; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; EDITOR; HEART INFARCTION; HEART MUSCLE INJURY; HUMAN; INSTRUMENT; LABORATORY; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; LABORATORY TEST; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL LITERATURE EDITOR; MEDICINE; NOTE; PLASMA; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE HYPERTROPHY; PROSTATITIS; RISK; SERUM; STORAGE;

HUMANS; JOURNALISM, MEDICAL; SPECIMEN HANDLING;

EID: 84861510375     PISSN: 00045632     EISSN: 17581001     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/acb.2011.201201     Document Type: Note

References (14)

1. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Clin Chem 2003;49:7-18
2. McShane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, Taube SE, Gion M, Clark GM, and for the Statistics Subcommittee of the NCI-EORTC Working Group on Cancer Diagnostics. Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK). J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1180-4
3. Smidt N, Overbeke J, de Vet H, Bossuyt P. Endorsement of the STARD statement by biomedical journals: survey of instructions for authors. Clin Chem 2007;53:1983-5
4. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, White HD, on behalf of the Joint ESC/ACCF/AHA/WHF Task Force for the Redefinition of Myocardial Infarction. Universal definition of myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2007;28: 2525-38
5. Morrow DA, Cannon CP, Jesse RL, et al. National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry laboratory medicine practice guidelines: clinical characteristics and utilization of biochemical markers in acute coronary syndromes. Clin Chem 2007;53:552-74
6. Apple FS. A new season for cardiac troponin assays: it's time to keep a scorecard. Clin Chem 2009;55:1303-6
7. Apple FS, Collinson PO, for the IFCC Task Force on Clinical Applications of Cardiac Biomarkers. Analytical characteristics of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays. Clin Chem 2012;58:54-61
8. Apple FS. Counterpoint: standardization of cardiac troponin I assays will not occur in my lifetime. Clin Chem 2012;58:169-71
9. Catalona WJ, Partin AW, Slawin KM, et al. Use of the percentage of free prostate-specific antigen to enhance differentiation of prostate cancer from benign prostatic disease: a prospective multicenter clinical trial. JAMA 1998;279:1542-7
10. Chun FK, Karakiewicz PI, Briganti A, et al. A critical appraisal of logistic regression-based nomograms, artificial neural networks, classification and regression-tree models, look-up tables and risk-group stratification models for prostate cancer. BJU Int 2007;99:794-800
11. Stephan C, Klaas M, Müller C, Schnorr D, Loening SA, Jung K. Interchangeability of measurements of total and free prostate-specific antigen in serum with 5 frequently used assay combinations: an update. Clin Chem 2006;52:59-64
12. Stephan C, Siemßen K, Cammann H, et al. Between-method differences in prostate-specific antigen assays affect prostate cancer risk prediction by nomograms. Clin Chem 2011;57:995-1004
13. Chun FKH, Graefen M, Briganti A, et al. Initial biopsy outcome prediction - head-to-head comparison of a logistic regression-based nomogram versus artificial neural network. Eur Urol 2007;51:1236-43
14. Stephan C, Meyer HA, Cammann H, et al. Initial biopsy outcome prediction - head-to-head comparison of a logistic regression-based nomogram versus artificial neural network. Eur Urol 2007;51:1236-43, 1446-7