Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
Published Online First: 11 May 2007. doi:10.1136/jcp.2007.048512
Journal of Clinical Pathology 2007;60:1195-1204
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Association of Clinical Pathologists.

REVIEWS

Best practice in primary care pathology: review 10

W S A Smellie1, N Shaw2, R Bowley2, M F Stewart3, A M Kelly4, P J Twomey5, P R Chadwick6, J B Houghton7, J P Ng8 and A J McCulloch9

1 Department of Chemical Pathology, Bishop Auckland General Hospital, Bishop Auckland, UK
2 Sowerby Centre for Health Informatics, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
3 Dept of Clinical Biochemistry, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK
4 Department of Chemical Pathology, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, UK
5 Department of Chemical Pathology, Ipswich Hospital, Ipswich, UK
6 Department of Microbiology, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK
7 Department of Haematology, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK
8 Department of Haematology, Barnsley Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Barnsley, UK
9 Department of Medicine, Bishop Auckland General Hospital, Bishop Auckland, UK

Correspondence to:
Dr W S A Smellie, Department of Chemical Pathology, Bishop Auckland General Hospital, Cockton Hill Road, Bishop Auckland, County Durham DL14 6AD, UK; info{at}smellie.com

ABSTRACT

This tenth best practice review examines four series of common primary care questions in laboratory medicine: (i) antenatal testing in pregnant women; (ii) estimated glomerular filtration rate calculation; (iii) safety testing for methotrexate; and (iv) blood glucose measurement in diabetes. The review is presented in question–answer format, referenced for each question series. The recommendations represent a précis of guidance found using a standardised literature search of national and international guidance notes, consensus statements, health policy documents and evidence-based medicine reviews, supplemented by Medline Embase searches to identify relevant primary research documents. They are not standards but form a guide to be set in the clinical context. Most are consensus rather than evidence-based. They will be updated periodically to take account of new information.

Keywords: best practice; evidence-based medicine; interdisciplinary; primary care


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Smellie, W S A, Vanderpump, M P J, Fraser, W D, Bowley, R, Shaw, N (2008). Best practice in primary care pathology: review 11. J. Clin. Pathol. 61: 410-418 [Abstract] [Full Text]  

This Article

Services
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Topic Collections
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

Pathology jobs

Pathology jobs