<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">378879227</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180305123428.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">161128e20030721xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1515/CCLM.2003.145</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)gruyter-10.1515/CCLM.2003.145</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">Problems of Comparing Blood Glucose Molality and Molarity Determined with an Omni, anEML 105 and an Ebio Analyser</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[Rainer Haeckel, Petra Hänecke]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">The comparability between glucose concentrations measured in various sample systems is still a matter of debate. Decision limits are usually determined in venous plasma and then converted to either blood or to the aqueous compartment (activity). The conversion factors recommended have not yet been generally accepted. In the present study, glucose concentrations were determined in blood and plasma with an Ebio analyzer (molarity) and in the aqueous compartment with both an EML 105 and an Omni (molality). All analytical results were referred to the same aqueous standard solution. The Ebio results agreed with reference method values in control materials. Concentrations determined in the various sample systems from patients (molarity) correlated well with the molality values measured either with the EML or the Omni. However, the mean values of the EML were not consistent with those derived theoretically by considering the different water content. With the Omni, only molality values in whole blood appeared plausible, but not in plasma, although the two sample systems should provide identical molality values. The EML results were almost identical in whole blood and plasma. Theoretically, glucose molality would be the ideal diagnostic quantity. However, no diagnostic advantage of molality determined in whole blood with the Omni vs. molarity values could be detected in a group of 40 non-diabetic and 27 diabetic subjects.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Copyright © 2003 by Walter de Gruyter GmbH &amp; Co. KG</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Medical equipment &amp; techniques</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Medical diagnosis</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Diseases &amp; disorders</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Haeckel</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Rainer</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Hänecke</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Petra</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Walter de Gruyter</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">41/7(2003-07-21), 950-957</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">1434-6621</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">41:7&lt;950</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2003</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">41</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">cclm</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2003.145</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2003.145</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Haeckel</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Rainer</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Hänecke</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Petra</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Walter de Gruyter</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">41/7(2003-07-21), 950-957</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">1434-6621</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">41:7&lt;950</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2003</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">41</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">cclm</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="b">CC0</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-gruyter</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
