Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Laboratory tests are crucial in both diagnostics and research. The competence of personnel directly impacts the quality of results. While in diagnostic settings technician expertise is appreciated, this factor is often overlooked in research environments. This study examined the influence of experience on the accuracy of laboratory tests. Two experienced technicians (ExpT) from an ISO15189-certified medical laboratory and two inexperienced PhD students (InexpP) performed an IGFBP3 ELISA, a mTSH multiplex assay, and oligoclonal band electrophoresis. ExpTs followed standard operating procedures, while InexpPs used kit inserts. Duplicate coefficients of variation (CV%) were calculated, and test results were compared. Results of the InexpPs showed lower accuracy. For IGFBP3, the mean duplicate CV% was 3.1 % for ExpTs versus 26.2 % for InexpPs. For mTSH the mean duplicate CV% was 4.8 % for ExpTs and 17.4 % for InexpPs. Correlation coefficients between the results of ExpTs for IGFBP3 and mTSH measurements were 0.977 and 0.997, respectively, whereas correlation coefficients between InexpPs and ExpTs' mean results were 0.605 and 0.283 for IGFBP3 and mTSH, respectively. InexpPs failed to produce some electrophoresis bands and introduced errors such as air bubbles and artifacts. Less laboratory experience leads to less accurate test results, which may affect the interpretation of these results. To ensure accuracy in research settings, it is important to be aware of laboratory expertise. It is recommended that the experience levels and competence of those who performed the laboratory analysis are reported in scientific methods sections. • Technician experience, especially in research settings, is often undervalued. • Inexperienced technicians produced higher duplicate CV% in ELISA and multiplex assays. • Inexperience led to compromised data quality, with missing bands, air bubbles, and artifacts in the results. • Reporting analyst expertise in scientific methods is recommended to improve transparency and reliability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Özcan et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: