Afzal Nayab, Ahmed Sibtain
Section of Clinical Chemistry, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
EJIFCC. 2024 Aug 8;35(2):71-82. eCollection 2024 Aug.
Reference intervals (RI) are a vital part of information provided with laboratory results. It is recommended that RI should be established by each laboratory following pre-laid guidelines. In this systemic review, we aim to comprehensively analyze and summarize all the published literature about establishment of RI for biochemical parameters in Pakistani population.
We conducted a comprehensive search using Medline (PubMed interface) and PakMediNet literature, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. The search spanned from January 1984 to February 2024. All studies done for establishment of RI of biochemical parameters were included, while were nonhuman studies, case studies, preprints, no full text and articles in languages other than English were excluded. Rigorous evaluation ensured the robustness of their study analysis.
Database search reveled 161 studies, 30 were analyzed as per inclusion criteria. The accumulated sample size of the studies comprised 108,563 individuals. Most of the studies were carried out on adults in Punjab and Sindh provinces. A wide variation was noted among the RIs established and units used in each study. Gaps were identified regarding description of healthy population, patient preparation sample handing and quality control.
In this review, critical gaps in data, methodology and reporting were identified. To enhance future studies, researchers should clearly define healthy populations, incorporate rigorous sample handling and quality control, and collaborate across centers.
参考区间（RI）是实验室结果所提供信息的重要组成部分。建议每个实验室按照预先制定的指南来建立参考区间。在本系统评价中，我们旨在全面分析和总结所有已发表的关于巴基斯坦人群生化参数参考区间建立的文献。
我们按照PRISMA指南，使用Medline（PubMed界面）和PakMediNet文献进行了全面检索。检索时间跨度为1984年1月至2024年2月。纳入所有为建立生化参数参考区间而进行的研究，排除非人研究、案例研究、预印本、无全文以及非英语语言的文章。严格评估确保了研究分析的稳健性。
数据库检索发现161项研究，根据纳入标准分析了30项。这些研究的累计样本量为108,563人。大多数研究是在旁遮普省和信德省的成年人中进行的。各研究建立的参考区间和使用的单位存在很大差异。在健康人群描述、患者准备、样本处理和质量控制方面发现了差距。
在本综述中，确定了数据、方法和报告方面的关键差距。为了加强未来的研究，研究人员应明确界定健康人群，采用严格的样本处理和质量控制，并跨中心开展合作。
