Distinguishing reference intervals and clinical decision limits – A review by the IFCC committee on reference intervals and decision limits

dc.contributor.authorSikaris, Ken Andrew
dc.contributor.authorStreichert, Thomas
dc.contributor.authorMacri, Joseph
dc.contributor.buuauthorİlçöl, Yeşim Özarda
dc.contributor.departmentUludağ Üniversitesi/Tıp Fakültesi/Tıbbı Biyokimya Anabilim Dalı.tr_TR
dc.contributor.researcheridAAL-8873-2021tr_TR
dc.contributor.scopusid35741320500tr_TR
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-21T12:13:49Z
dc.date.available2022-12-21T12:13:49Z
dc.date.issued2018-05-18
dc.description.abstractReference Intervals (RIs) and clinical decision limits (CDLs) are a vital part of the information supplied by laboratories to support the interpretation of numerical clinical pathology results. RIs describe the typical distribution of results seen in a healthy reference population while CDLs are associated with a significantly higher risk of adverse clinical outcomes or are diagnostic for the presence of a specific disease. However, as the two concepts are sometimes confused, there is a need to clarify the differences between these terms and to ensure they are easily distinguished, especially because CDLs have a clinical association with specific diseases and risks, thereby implying that effective clinical interventions are available. It is important to note that, because population-based RIs are derived from the range of values expected in a typical community population, laboratory results that fall outside a RI do not necessarily indicate a disease but rather that additional medical follow-up and/or treatment may be warranted. In contrast, CDLs are associated with a risk of specific adverse outcomes, and are commonly used to interpret laboratory test results, including lipid parameters, glucose, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and tumor markers, to determine risk of disease, to diagnose or to treat. In recent years, the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) Committee on Reference Intervals and Decision Limits (C-RIDL) has focused primarily on RIs and has performed multicenter studies to obtain common RIs. However, the broader responsibility of the Committee, from its name, includes decision limits. C-RIDL now aims to emphasize the importance of the correct use of both RIs and CDLs and to encourage laboratories to specify the appropriate information to clinicians as needed. This review discusses RIs and CDLs in detail, describes the similarities and the differences between these two important tools in laboratory medicine, and clearly explains the processes used to define them. C-RIDL encourages the involvement of laboratory professionals in the establishment of both RIs and CDLs.en_US
dc.identifier.citationÖzarda, Y. vd. (2018). ''Distinguishing reference intervals and clinical decision limits – A review by the IFCC committee on reference intervals and decision limits''. Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences, 55(6), 420-431.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage431tr_TR
dc.identifier.issn1040-8363
dc.identifier.issn1549-781X
dc.identifier.issue6tr_TR
dc.identifier.pubmed30047297tr_TR
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85051077162tr_TR
dc.identifier.startpage420tr_TR
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1080/10408363.2018.1482256
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408363.2018.1482256
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11452/30010
dc.identifier.volume55tr_TR
dc.identifier.wos000440701500003tr_TR
dc.indexed.pubmedPubMeden_US
dc.indexed.scopusScopusen_US
dc.indexed.wosSCIEen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherTaylor and Francisen_US
dc.relation.collaborationYurt dışıtr_TR
dc.relation.collaborationSanayitr_TR
dc.relation.journalCritical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciencesen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergitr_TR
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectReference intervalsen_US
dc.subjectClinical decision limitsen_US
dc.subjectC-RIDLen_US
dc.subjectClinical laboratoriesen_US
dc.subjectProstate-specific antigenen_US
dc.subjectEuropean atherosclerosis societyen_US
dc.subjectPrediatric peference intervalsen_US
dc.subjectApproved recommendation1987en_US
dc.subjectJoint consensus statementen_US
dc.subjectHigh-density-lipoproteinen_US
dc.subjectReference valuesen_US
dc.subject99th percentileen_US
dc.subjectAnalytical performanceen_US
dc.subjectGlobal multicenteren_US
dc.subjectMedical laboratory technologyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeGlucoseen_US
dc.subject.emtreeHemoglobin A1cen_US
dc.subject.emtreeLipiden_US
dc.subject.emtreeClinical decision limiten_US
dc.subject.emtreeClinical decision makingen_US
dc.subject.emtreeHealth care organizationen_US
dc.subject.emtreeHumanen_US
dc.subject.emtreeLaboratory testen_US
dc.subject.emtreePriority journalen_US
dc.subject.emtreeReference valueen_US
dc.subject.emtreeReviewen_US
dc.subject.emtreeLaboratoryen_US
dc.subject.emtreeLaboratory techniqueen_US
dc.subject.emtreeOrganization and managementen_US
dc.subject.emtreeStandardsen_US
dc.subject.meshClinical laboratory techniquesen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshLaboratoriesen_US
dc.subject.meshReference valuesen_US
dc.subject.scopusClinical Chemistry; Thyrotropin; Chemical Speciesen_US
dc.subject.wosMedical laboratory technologyen_US
dc.titleDistinguishing reference intervals and clinical decision limits – A review by the IFCC committee on reference intervals and decision limitsen_US
dc.typeReview
dc.wos.quartileQ1en_US

Files

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: