Nelson L, Charache S, Keyser E, Metzger P
Am J Clin Pathol. 1985 May;83(5):547-54. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/83.5.547.
Comparisons were made between "electronic" white blood cell (WBC) differential counts based on nuclear volume, differential counts performed by an automated image analyzer, and conventional manual counts performed by experienced technologists in a routine laboratory setting. The correlation between methods was excellent for lymphocytes (r = 0.9) and granulocytes (r = 0.9), but none of the three methods that were tested produced good results in enumeration of mononuclear cells (r = 0.6). Approximately 85% of the samples on which differentials were requested for an inpatient population could be processed by the electronic counter. Although the electronic counter failed to flag all abnormal samples (there were 6% false negatives), the performance of technologists doing 200 cell differentials was similar. Rapidly generated "electronic differentials" might be a useful and cost-effective adjunct to inpatient hospital practice if certain suggestions were implemented.
对基于细胞核体积的“电子”白细胞（WBC）分类计数、自动图像分析仪进行的分类计数以及常规实验室环境中经验丰富的技术人员进行的传统手工计数进行了比较。淋巴细胞（r = 0.9）和粒细胞（r = 0.9）的方法间相关性极佳，但测试的三种方法在单核细胞计数方面均未产生良好结果（r = 0.6）。约85%为住院患者群体进行分类计数的样本可由电子计数器处理。尽管电子计数器未能标记所有异常样本（有6%的假阴性），但进行200次细胞分类计数的技术人员的表现与之相似。如果实施某些建议，快速生成的“电子分类计数”可能是住院医院实践中一种有用且具成本效益的辅助手段。
