Clinical laboratories frequently encounter samples showing significant haemolysis, icterus or lipaemia. Technical advances, utilizing spectrophotometric measurements on automated chemistry analysers, allow rapid and accurate identification of such samples. However, accurate quantification of haemolysis, icterus and lipaemia interference is of limited value if laboratories do not set rational alert limits, based on sound interference testing experiments. Furthermore, in the context of increasing consolidation of laboratories and the formation of laboratory networks, there is an increasing requirement for harmonization of the handling of haemolysis, icterus and lipaemia-affected samples across different analytical platforms. Harmonization may be best achieved by considering both the analytical aspects of index measurement and the possible variations in the effects of haemolysis, icterus and lipaemia interferences on assays from different manufacturers. Initial verification studies, followed up with ongoing quality control testing, can help a laboratory ensure the accuracy of haemolysis, icterus and lipaemia index results, as well as assist in managing any biases in index results from analysers from different manufacturers. Similarities, and variations, in the effect of haemolysis, icterus and lipaemia interference in assays from different manufacturers can often be predicted from the mechanism of interference. Nevertheless, interference testing is required to confirm expected similarities or to quantify differences. It is important that laboratories are familiar with a number of interference testing protocols and the particular strengths and weaknesses of each. A rigorous approach to all aspects of haemolysis, icterus and lipaemia interference testing allows the analytical progress in index measurement to be translated into improved patient care.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
9
3%
Other
38
15%
Unknown
126
48%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 28 July 2026.
All research outputs
#2,747,315
of 32,436,195 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Clinical Biochemistry
#49
of 1,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,024
of 328,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Clinical Biochemistry
#3
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,436,195 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,606 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 328,204 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
