Advertisement
Review Article| Volume 37, ISSUE 1, P35-45, March 2017

Rhetoric Versus Reality? Laboratory Surveys Show Actual Practice Differs Considerably from Proposed Models and Mandated Calculations

Published:December 05, 2016DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cll.2016.09.004

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribers receive full online access to your subscription and archive of back issues up to and including 2002.

      Content published before 2002 is available via pay-per-view purchase only.

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Clinics in Laboratory Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. Analytical global goal survey results. 2015. Available at: https://www.westgard.com/global-goal-results.htm. Accessed October 26, 2016.

      2. Measurement uncertainty survey results. 2015. Available at: https://www.westgard.com/mu-global-survey.htm. Accessed August 22, 2016.

      3. IQCP survey results 2016. 2016. Available at: https://www.westgard.com/iqcp-user-survey.htm. Accessed August 22, 2016.

      4. IQCP homepage. Available at: https://www.cms.gov/regulations-and-guidance/legislation/CLIA/Individualized_Quality_Control_Plan_IQCP.html. Accessed August 22, 2016.

      5. Equivocal QC. Coming soon to a laboratory near you. 2007. Available at: https://www.westgard.com/essay119.htm. Accessed August 22, 2016.

        • Laessig R.H.
        • Ehrymeyer S.S.
        CLIA 2003’s new concept: equivalent quality control.
        MLO Med Lab Obs. 2005; 37 (Available at:) (Accessed August 22, 2016): 32-34
      6. EP23–A. Available at: http://shop.clsi.org/method-evaluation-documents/EP23.html. Accessed August 22, 2016.

      7. IQCP for a POC device. 2016. Available at: https://www.westgard.com/iqcp-poc-chemistry.htm. Accessed August 18, 2016.

      8. An outside review of an IQCP for POC. 2016. Available at: http://www.westgard.com/iqcp-poc-review.htm. Accessed August 18, 2016.

        • Shebl N.A.
        • Franklin B.D.
        • Barber N.
        Failure mode and effects analysis outputs: are they valid?.
        BMC Health Serv Res. 2012; 12: 150
        • Franklin B.D.
        • Shebl N.A.
        • Barber N.
        Failure mode and effects analysis: too little for too much?.
        BMJ Qual Saf. 2012; 21: 607-611
        • Shebl N.A.
        • Franklin B.D.
        • Barber N.
        Is failure mode and effect analysis reliable?.
        J Patient Saf. 2009; 5: 86-94
      9. 2016 IQCP users survey – the comments section2016. . Available at: https://www.westgard.com/iqcp-user-survey-comments.htm. Accessed August 18, 2016.

      10. 2016 IQCP users survey global results. 2016. Available at: https://www.westgard.com/iqcp-user-survey-global.htm. Accessed August 18, 2016.

      11. ISO 15189:2012. Available at: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=56115. Accessed August 22, 2016.