Biochemia Medica appoints the new Editor-in-Chief

It is my great honor and pleasure to be appointed as the Editor-in-Chief of the journal Biochemia Medica. I thank the Journal Editorial Board and Executive Board of the Croatian Society of Medi-cal Biochemists for giving me such a wonderful opportunity. I also wish to express my special thanks to prof. Elizabeta Topic and prof. Dubravka Cvoriscec. Throughout the last six years du-ring their distinguished service as Editors-in-Chief of Biochemia Medica, this Journal has made an unprecedented progress. Their vision, commitment and professionalism have led the editorial team of this Journal on its way, continuously striving to increase its quality. Being an Editor of a scientific journal is highly responsible and demanding role. Thank you both for what you have done for this Journal, for having knowledge and courage to manage the change of the journal content, editorial policy, content and design, for implementing technological improvements, for involving younger colleagues and giving them a chance to learn from you and work in such a stimulating atmosphere. The net result of your tremendous efforts is recogni-zed by scientists and colleagues not only in Croatia, but also internationally. We are receiving more and more submissions over time. The quality of submissions and papers published is increasing as well as the number of web site visits, citations and downloads. Last year the Journal has even got its first impact factor. Maintaining this trend in such a competitive environment will therefore be my biggest challenge. I hope I will be able to manage and catalyze further improvements in the quality of this Journal, by producing the highest-quality publications, promoting the journal and making its way into some of the most prestigious bibliographic databases. This advancement would not have been possible without the shared commitment and collaborati-ve efforts of many individuals: editorial board members, reviewers, authors and readers. I warmly invite you all to continue supporting our work in the following years

Bias in research

By writing scientific articles we communicate science among colleagues and peers. By doing this, it is our responsibility to adhere to some basic principles like transparency and accuracy. Authors, journal editors and reviewers need to be concerned about the quality of the work submitted for publication and ensure that only studies which have been designed, conducted and reported in a transparent way, honestly and without any deviation from the truth get to be published. Any such trend or deviation from the truth in data collection, analysis, interpretation and publication is called bias. Bias in research can occur either intentionally or unintentionally. Bias causes false conclusions and is potentially misleading. Therefore, it is immoral and unethical to conduct biased research. Every scientist should thus be aware of all potential sources of bias and undertake all possible actions to reduce or minimize the deviation from the truth. This article describes some basic issues related to bias in research

News at Biochemia Medica: Research integrity corner, updated Guidelines to authors, revised Author statement form and adopted ICMJE Conflict-of-interest form

From the issue 23(1) we have implemented several major changes in the editorial policies and procedures. We hope that those changes will raise awareness of our potential authors and reviewers for research and publication integrity issues as well as to improve the quality of our submissions and published articles. Among those changes is the launch of a special journal section called Research Integrity Corner. In this section we aim to publish educational articles dealing with different research and publication misconduct issues. Moreover, we have done a comprehensive revision of our Instructions to authors. Whereas our former Instructions to authors have mostly been concerned with recommendations for manuscript preparation and submission, the revised document additionally describes the editorial procedure for all submitted articles and provides exact journal policies towards research integrity, authorship, copyright and conflict of interest. By putting these Guidelines into action, we hope that our main ethical policies and requirements are now visible and available to all our potential authors. We have also revised the former Authorship and copyright form which is now called the Author statement form. This form now contains statements on the authorship, originality of work, research ethics, patient privacy and confidentiality, and copyright transfer. Finally, Journal has adopted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. From this issue, for each submitted article, authors are requested to fill out the “ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest” as well as the Author statement form and upload those forms during the online manuscript submission process. We honestly believe that our authors and readers will appreciate such endeavors. In this Editorial article we briefly explain the background and the nature of those recent major editorial changes

Biochemia Medica introduces the revised policy on Statement of Conflict of Interest

Biochemia Medica announces that from this issue Journal will be publishing the Statement on Conflict of Interest for Authors for all article types in printed as well as in electronic form of the Journal. This way Journal wishes to provide its readers the opportunity to unambiguously judge the quality and reliability of the data presentation and potential competing interests that could have biased the quality of the presented work in any way. This decision was made because we believe that scientific journals have an ultimate responsibility to provide unbiased scientific articles to its readership. We also believe that if any potential source of bias exists, it is the responsibility of the journal to disclose this informati-on, since this might influence the judging the manuscript by editors, reviewers and readers. Therefore, when submitting their work in the future, author are kindly invited to make sure that they have carefully considered and disclosed all potential sources of competing interests that might have influ-enced their work. We hope that in such way we can help build a better future for the evidence based scientific research, on an international level

Preanalytical Phase – an updated review of the current evidence

European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working group for preanalytical phase (WG-PRE) has recently launched a series of conferences on preanalytical phase. First such meeting was held in Parma (Italy) in the spring of 2011 and the second one took place in Zagreb (Croatia) during 1-2 March 2013. The Zagreb audience had the opportunity to enjoy a focused and challenging scientific program as well as to participate actively in interactive e-voting sessions. Speakers of the conference have kindly accepted the invitation to submit their review articles covering topics presented during the meeting. This Journal issue comprises a number of high quality review articles providing an updated overview of the current evidence on the various preanalytical issues. The first article in this series is presented by prof. Walter G. Guder who has prepared a historical overview of the milestones in the development of the key concepts in the field of preanalytical phase (1). Bowen and Remaley in their article provide an excellent update on the most important blood collection tube additives and their components which may affect laboratory test results (2). De Carli and her colleagues have compiled the existing evidence of healthcare workers risk of sharps injuries and subsequent infections and review respective prevention strategies (3). Several subsequent articles are dedicated to some preanalytical sources of interferences such as lipemia (4), physical activity (5) and medical contrast media (6). Delanghe and Speeckaert have reviewed current preanalytical problems and requirements for the most common urinary analytes, with a special highlight of the importance of the preanalytical phase in urine toxicology and metabolomics (7). Last, but not the least, this article series also covers the recent advances in the harmonization of preanalytical quality indicators (8) and External Quality Assessment Schemes for the pre-analytical phase (9). We hope that this series shall contribute to the better understanding and recognition of various important preanalytical phase variables. As this body of evidence grows, we will keep you updated by providing high quality reviews and original research addressing the current and future preanalytical challenges

Education in clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine in various European countries

Understanding the complexity and heterogeneity of the educational systems, across Europe, aids in the identification of new initiatives in defining the core competences and skills necessary to practice the profession. Basic education of those who practice laboratory medicine, in European countries, may be in medicine, pharmacy, biochemistry or science. Their postgraduate education may last quite a variable time: from several months to several years, depending on the country. Some countries have established official registers and licensing system, whereas others may still not have that. In some countries profession is regulated by law, whereas in others that is not the case. Harmonization and common regulation of the undergraduate and postgraduate education and vocational training programs in clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine in various EU countries has therefore become the top priority within the European community. In this themed issue we deliver a series of articles describing the way professionals practicing laboratory medicine are educated and trained in several European countries: Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Hungary, Lithuania, Ukraine and Greece. I wish to thank to all authors for their valuable contribution. I hope that readers will appreciate their efforts and read this special issue with great interest

Dark brown serum and plasma samples: a case report

This case report describes occurrence of unusual, dark brown coloration of citrate plasma and serum samples in a female 68 years old patient admitted into Emergency department (ED). Patient complained of nausea and vomiting, fever up to 38.9°C, colicky pain in abdomen, diminished urinary output and yellowish skin tone. Her medical history included arterial hypertension, hypothyroidism and facial squamous cell carcinoma. For previous two years, she was treated with tuberculostatic therapy for Mycobacterium avium positive interstitial lung disease. Regular follow-up showed no signs of active disease. Upon admission to ED, complete blood count (CBC) analysis showed low red blood count (RBC) (3.76 x1012/L (reference interval (RI) 3.86 – 5.08 x1012/L)), low haemoglobin (Hb) concentration (111 g/L (RI 119 - 157 g/L)) and low haematocrit (Hct) (0.310 L/L (RI 0.360 – 0.470 L/L)). Biochemistry analytes were high, with foremost lactate dehydrogenase (LD) activity (2900 U/L, RI < 240 U/L). After communication with the clinician, methaemoglobin measured in arterial blood gas sample was reported. Patient was admitted to the Intensive care unit and upon reflex testing of haptoglobin, intravascular haemolysis was confirmed. This case indicates that every case of brown coloration of the serum must be promptly communicated to the clinician. Reflex testing assured timely diagnosis and favourable patient outcome

Overview on patient safety in healthcare and laboratory diagnostics

The healthcare context is characterized by a high degree of complexity. Despite eager efforts of the healthcare personnel, sometimes things go wrong and produce unintentional harm to the patients. As such, patient safety must be considered as one of leading healthcare challenges. Some foremost studies have highlighted that serious medical errors might occur rather frequently, jeopardizing patient\u27s health and costing a huge amount of money to the healthcare system. A medical error is traditionally defined as an unintended act, the failure of a planned action to be completed as intended, the use of a wrong plan to achieve an aim when the failure can not be attributed to chance. Medical errors can be classified according to several models, such as the clinical pathway (i.e., diagnostic, treatment, prevention and others), or the resulting harm to the patient (i.e., near misses, no harm or harmful incident). Medical errors can also be classified in skill-based slips and lapses (i.e., errors of action), or rule and knowledge-based mistakes (i.e., errors of intention). According to the source, most errors result from the combination of active failures and latent conditions. It is noteworthy, however, that diagnostic errors have been frequently underestimated in the clinical practice. A laboratory error is any defect occurring at any part of the laboratory cycle, from ordering tests to reporting, interpreting, and reacting to results. Although they have been traditionally identified with analytical problems and uncertainty of measurements, an extensive scientific literature now attests that the vast majority of these arise from the extra-analytical activities of the total testing process. Data from representative studies also show that preanalytical errors are the first cause of variability in laboratory testing. The aim of this article is to provide an overview on the current knowledge about patient safety in healthcare and laboratory diagnostics