
pmid: 23195791
pmc: PMC5707193
Control of biospecimen quality that is linked to processing is one of the goals of biospecimen science. Consensus is lacking, however, regarding optimal sample quality-control (QC) tools (ie, markers and assays). The aim of this review was to identify QC tools, both for fluid and solid-tissue samples, based on a comprehensive and critical literature review. The most readily applicable tools are those with a known threshold for the preanalytical variation and a known reference range for the QC analyte. Only a few meaningful markers were identified that meet these criteria, such as CD40L for assessing serum exposure at high temperatures and VEGF for assessing serum freeze-thawing. To fully assess biospecimen quality, multiple QC markers are needed. Here we present the most promising biospecimen QC tools that were identified.
Quality Control, Biomedical Research, Evidence-Based Medicine, control tools, Reference Values, 610, Humans, biospecimen, Biomarkers, Specimen Handling
Quality Control, Biomedical Research, Evidence-Based Medicine, control tools, Reference Values, 610, Humans, biospecimen, Biomarkers, Specimen Handling
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 73 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
