ArticleScientific reports2026
Big data-driven establishment and bias comparison of serum ferritin reference intervals in Zhejiang Chinese adults using six algorithms.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study systematically compared the performance of six algorithms for establishing serum ferritin (SF) reference intervals (RIs) using data from large-scale health check-up populations (22,359 cases from Hospital A and 555 cases from Hospital B) and 327 anemia patients. Methods included non-parametric (EP28-NP) and parametric (EP28-P) approaches per EP28-A3c guidelines, along with modern algorithms (TMC, refineR, Kosmic, Bhattacharya). Continuous RIs were constructed using GAMLSS. Results showed good consistency in lower RIs limits between EP28-NP and four modern algorithms. Using EP28-NP as an example, male RIs (20–92 years) were 68.8-495.5 ng/mL, while females exhibited age-gradient characteristics: 20–45 years (10.4-132.5 ng/mL), 46–58 years (13.8-241.6 ng/mL), and 59–90 years (43.7-348.8 ng/mL). All algorithms demonstrated satisfactory validation rates (90.91%-98.67%). Notably, application of laboratory-established RIs significantly increased SF abnormality detection rates in anemia patients from 13.2% to 33.6% compared to manufacturer standards. Continuous RIs revealed significant SF concentration increases in males aged 20–29 years and females aged 46–58 years. The study demonstrates that laboratory-developed RIs better reflect population characteristics than manufacturer standards, and recommends that laboratories select appropriate algorithms based on data distribution to establish localized reference criteria.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.