IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0302617.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performance evaluation of Rayto RT-7600Vet hematology analyzer in side-by-side comparison with manual hematological methods for apparently healthy Cholistani cattle blood

Author

Listed:
  • Umer Farooq
  • Mushtaq Hussain Lashari
  • Zia Ur Rehman
  • Musadiq Idris
  • Haroon Rashid
  • Shagufta Nasreen
  • Farah Laraib
  • Rubaisha Ameer
  • Maryam Chauhdary
  • Iram Fatima

Abstract

The present study is the first from Pakistan being reported with an objective to assess performance of Rayto RT-7600Vet hematology analyzer (HA) for Cholistani cattle blood (n = 134), in comparison to the manual hematological methods. The four hematological attributes viz. total erythrocyte count (TEC), hemoglobin (Hb), packed cell volume (PCV) and platelet count (PLT) were deduced through HA (A) and manual (M) methods. Various statistical tests were implied to ascertain level of interrelationship, accuracy and level of agreement between the two methods. All attributes attained through manual methods had high positive, leptokurtic distribution (having many outliers) except for PLT-M and PCV-M. The coefficient of variation for attributes attained through HA and manual methods ranged from 16–24% and from 16–59%, respectively. Comparison between the overall results revealed that all the studied attributes, except TEC, were significantly (P≤0.05) different for both methods. A weak relationship was noticed between the attributes attained through two methods as indicated by weak r-values and adjusted r-square values. The reliability level of estimating Hb and PCV had highest intraclass correlation coefficient value of 0.722 and 0.555 for average measures, respectively. However, accuracy level, as determined through Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient was highest for TEC (0.9504) for both analytical methods. Poor level of agreement, in general, was shown for the two methods of analysis regarding all four hematological attributes through Bland and Altman test. In conclusion, the Rayto RT-7600Vet) may present data having higher skewness, kurtosis, and CV%, however, they are valid for multi-species hematological analysis. Caution must however, be taken in interpreting their results with corrected reference intervals and CV% for each machine and for each tested attribute.

Suggested Citation

  • Umer Farooq & Mushtaq Hussain Lashari & Zia Ur Rehman & Musadiq Idris & Haroon Rashid & Shagufta Nasreen & Farah Laraib & Rubaisha Ameer & Maryam Chauhdary & Iram Fatima, 2025. "Performance evaluation of Rayto RT-7600Vet hematology analyzer in side-by-side comparison with manual hematological methods for apparently healthy Cholistani cattle blood," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(3), pages 1-13, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0302617
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302617
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0302617
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0302617&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0302617?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0302617. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.