NakedSignal

Change explorer · Haematology and immunology

Platelet count between two haematology analysers, impedance vs impedance

Public dataA public method-comparison deposit, not a laboratory's data. Systems are described generically; the source names them.

Haematology analyser A, impedance platelet count replaced by haematology analyser B, impedance platelet count: 21 paired results from a published study by Xiong et al. (2026), re-analysed by NakedSignal as if the study were one laboratory. At 100, 150 ×10⁹/L, 0 results changed category after the change, against about 0 expected from repeat testing alone. Here the change moved fewer results than repeat testing would, and the report says so.

run 25 September 2026 · config 6eb23df45893 · run file sha256 5586cd892ef1

Haematology and immunology

Platelet count, ×10⁹/L

Haematology analyser A, impedance platelet count replaced by Haematology analyser B, impedance platelet count. 21 paired results.

Compare it with the other comparisons in the explorer

Comparison line

The new system reads 3.9% higher than the old system on average. The comparison line has a slope of 0.924 (95% interval 0.764 to 1.156) and an intercept of 0.971.

Public data
Comparison line, platelet count (×10⁹/L)Comparison line with slope 0.924 (95% interval 0.764 to 1.156) and intercept 0.971, drawn against the line of no change. Decision limits drawn at 100, 150 ×10⁹/L. Where the comparison line sits above the line of no change, the new system reads higher; below, lower.5010015050100150100150No changeComparison lineOld system, ×10⁹/LNew system, ×10⁹/L

Fig. 1. The comparison line against the line of no change, over the range of the decision limits (100, 150 ×10⁹/L). Dots mark where each line meets each limit; the gap between them is the bias at that limit.

run 25 September 2026 · config 6eb23df45893 · run file sha256 5586cd892ef1

Crossing each limit

Results that moved across a decision limit when the new system replaced the old, against the number repeat testing on one unchanged system would move. The program reports the count across all limits together.

All decision limits together (100, 150 ×10⁹/L)

Crossed after the change: 0

Expected from repeat testing alone: about 0

Grade and warnings

  • Re-test band not computed: 21 usable pairs, fewer than 40.
  • Repeat-test imprecision: assumed, not measured at this site.

Source

Xiong L, Pan X, Peng M, Gan T, Deng C, Zha H, Wang Y (2026). Evaluation of pre-dilution combined with optical/fluorescent platelet counting for correcting pseudothrombocytopenia. Front Med (Lausanne). doi:10.3389/fmed.2026.1855339 (opens in a new tab); PMC13395694 (opens in a new tab). Licence: CC BY 4.0 (opens in a new tab). Changes: Paired results re-analysed by NakedSignal's program; instruments described generically; only derived results are shown. The deposit names the systems.

Show the numbers
All values for platelet count, Haematology analyser A, impedance platelet count to Haematology analyser B, impedance platelet count
FieldValue
Paired results used21
Comparison line slope0.924419
Slope, 95% interval0.763922 to 1.155833
Comparison line intercept0.97093
Mean difference, new minus old, as % of old3.879
Decision limits (×10⁹/L)100, 150
Crossed after the change0
Expected from repeat testing alone0.04
Band half-width (%)none
Re-tested, unseen data, median (%)none
Re-tested, unseen data, range (%)none
Excess caught, line and band (%)none
Excess caught, line alone (%)none

Related

Changing a system like this one?

Request a first site report