↓ Skip to main content

Sample Management: Recommendation for Best Practices and Harmonization from the Global Bioanalysis Consortium Harmonization Team

Overview of attention for article published in The AAPS Journal, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
Title
Sample Management: Recommendation for Best Practices and Harmonization from the Global Bioanalysis Consortium Harmonization Team
Published in
The AAPS Journal, January 2016
DOI 10.1208/s12248-016-9869-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J. Redrup, Harue Igarashi, Jay Schaefgen, Jenny Lin, Lisa Geisler, Mohamed Ben M’Barek, Subramanian Ramachandran, Thales Cardoso, Vera Hillewaert

Abstract

The importance of appropriate sample management in regulated bioanalysis is undeniable for clinical and non-clinical study support due to the fact that if the samples are compromised at any stage prior to analysis, the study results may be affected. Health authority regulations do not contain specific guidance on sample management; therefore, as part of the Global Bioanalysis Consortium (GBC), the A5 team was established to discuss sample management requirements and to put forward recommendations. The recommendations from the team concern the entire life span of the sample and include the following: 1. Sampling procedures should be described in the protocol or within the laboratory manual. This information should include the volume of the sample to be collected, the required anticoagulant, light sensitivity, collection and storage containers, and labeling with a unique identifier. 2. The correct procedures for processing and then storing the samples after collection at the clinical/non-clinical testing site and during shipment are also very important to ensure the analyte(s) stability and should be documented. 3. Chain of custody for the samples must be maintained throughout the complete life span of each sample. This is typically maintained via paper and electronic data systems, including Laboratory Information Management Systems (LIMS) where available. 4. Pre- and post-analysis storage location and conditions must also be clearly defined at the analytical laboratory. The storage temperature of the samples must be traceable and controlled by monitoring and warning alerts. The team suggests moving away from using temperatures and to adopt standard terminology of "room temperature," "refrigerator," "freezer," and "ultra-freezer" that have defined and industry-wide accepted temperature ranges. 5. At the end of the study, documentation of the samples' disposal is required.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 15%
Other 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 22 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 26 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 August 2019.
All research outputs
#6,966,427
of 22,846,662 outputs
Outputs from The AAPS Journal
#394
of 1,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,675
of 396,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AAPS Journal
#13
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,846,662 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,287 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,719 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.