Misuse of Laboratory Tests and Diagnostic Procedures

Robert E. Sandstrom; Marc Rendell; Don R. Lipsitt; Paul F. Griner; Robert J. Glaser

doi:10.1056/NEJM198304283081720

Misuse of Laboratory Tests and Diagnostic Procedures

Robert E. Sandstrom, Marc Rendell, Don R. Lipsitt, Paul F. Griner, Robert J. Glaser

Department of Medicine

Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter

Abstract

To the Editor: The Sounding Board article (Nov. 18 issue)¹ by Griner and Glaser should not go unquestioned. The authors opine that the prevalence of marked electrolyte disturbances in healthy persons not receiving medication approaches 1 in 1000. They argue that the electrolyte component of the SMA-6 is therefore not useful in screening. I am not surprised that the prevalence of abnormalities in the population, as defined, would be 1 in 1000. The population the authors describe is of the type that, if we are lucky, we try to employ for establishing normal ranges. It is unclear to me that.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1035-1036
Number of pages	2
Journal	New England Journal of Medicine
Volume	308
Issue number	17
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198304283081720
State	Published - Apr 28 1983

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

Medicine(all)

Access to Document

10.1056/NEJM198304283081720

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Misuse of Laboratory Tests and Diagnostic Procedures'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

Sandstrom, R. E., Rendell, M., Lipsitt, D. R., Griner, P. F., & Glaser, R. J. (1983). Misuse of Laboratory Tests and Diagnostic Procedures. New England Journal of Medicine, 308(17), 1035-1036. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198304283081720

@article{192e2ec7a8a3461099f75e54e83a8a9f,

title = "Misuse of Laboratory Tests and Diagnostic Procedures",

abstract = "To the Editor: The Sounding Board article (Nov. 18 issue)1 by Griner and Glaser should not go unquestioned. The authors opine that the prevalence of marked electrolyte disturbances in healthy persons not receiving medication approaches 1 in 1000. They argue that the electrolyte component of the SMA-6 is therefore not useful in screening. I am not surprised that the prevalence of abnormalities in the population, as defined, would be 1 in 1000. The population the authors describe is of the type that, if we are lucky, we try to employ for establishing normal ranges. It is unclear to me that.",

author = "Sandstrom, {Robert E.} and Marc Rendell and Lipsitt, {Don R.} and Griner, {Paul F.} and Glaser, {Robert J.}",

year = "1983",

month = apr,

day = "28",

doi = "10.1056/NEJM198304283081720",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "308",

pages = "1035--1036",

journal = "New England Journal of Medicine",

issn = "0028-4793",

publisher = "Massachussetts Medical Society",

number = "17",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Misuse of Laboratory Tests and Diagnostic Procedures

AU - Sandstrom, Robert E.

AU - Rendell, Marc

AU - Lipsitt, Don R.

AU - Griner, Paul F.

AU - Glaser, Robert J.

PY - 1983/4/28

Y1 - 1983/4/28

N2 - To the Editor: The Sounding Board article (Nov. 18 issue)1 by Griner and Glaser should not go unquestioned. The authors opine that the prevalence of marked electrolyte disturbances in healthy persons not receiving medication approaches 1 in 1000. They argue that the electrolyte component of the SMA-6 is therefore not useful in screening. I am not surprised that the prevalence of abnormalities in the population, as defined, would be 1 in 1000. The population the authors describe is of the type that, if we are lucky, we try to employ for establishing normal ranges. It is unclear to me that.

AB - To the Editor: The Sounding Board article (Nov. 18 issue)1 by Griner and Glaser should not go unquestioned. The authors opine that the prevalence of marked electrolyte disturbances in healthy persons not receiving medication approaches 1 in 1000. They argue that the electrolyte component of the SMA-6 is therefore not useful in screening. I am not surprised that the prevalence of abnormalities in the population, as defined, would be 1 in 1000. The population the authors describe is of the type that, if we are lucky, we try to employ for establishing normal ranges. It is unclear to me that.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0021114212&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0021114212&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1056/NEJM198304283081720

DO - 10.1056/NEJM198304283081720

M3 - Letter

C2 - 6835314

AN - SCOPUS:0021114212

VL - 308

SP - 1035

EP - 1036

JO - New England Journal of Medicine

JF - New England Journal of Medicine

SN - 0028-4793

IS - 17

ER -