Table 5 Comparision of different autoverification systems in the studies
Study | Year | Country | Assay | System Type | Sample Number | Passing Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Randell EW et al [6] | 2018 | Canada | Clinical Chemistry and immunoassay | Middleware | 80,867 | 91.1 to 94.7% |
Xia LY et al [27] | 2017 | China | Clinical Chemistry and immunoassay | LIS | 31,349 | 74.0% |
Krasowski MD et al [28] | 2014 | USA | Clinical Chemistry and immunoassay | Middleware | – | 99.5% |
Palmieri R et al [29] | 2018 | Italy | Urinalysis | AutionMAX-SediMAX | 1002 | 52.4% |
Sediq AM et al [5] | 2014 | Egypt | Thyroid Function | LIS | 563 | 63.8% |
Zhao Y et al [16] | 2014 | China | Coagulation | Middleware | 2353 | 82.0% |
Our Study | – | China | Coagulation | LIS | 83,699 | 78.86% |