Cargando…
Improving quality control for in‐clinic hematology analyzers: Common myths and opportunities
Autores principales: | Michael, Helen T., Nabity, Mary B., Couto, C. Guillermo, Moritz, Andreas, Harvey, John W., DeNicola, Dennis B., Hammond, Jeremy M. |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9543363/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36097323 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/vcp.13154 |
Ejemplares similares
-
Comparison of the performance of the IDEXX SediVue Dx® with manual microscopy for the detection of cells and 2 crystal types in canine and feline urine
por: Hernandez, Annalisa M., et al.
Publicado: (2018) -
Digital morphology analyzers in hematology: Comments on the ICSH review and recommendations
por: Bengtsson, Hans‐Inge
Publicado: (2020) -
Flagging performance of two automated hematology analyzers in blast cell screening
por: Zhang, Yang, et al.
Publicado: (2021) -
Common Myths and Legends of Rabies
por: Rohde, Rodney E.
Publicado: (2020) -
Big data at work: dispelling the myths, uncovering the opportunities
por: Davenport, Thomas
Publicado: (2014)