Aims To propose recommendations related to the presentation, content and formulation of full blood count analysis reports.
Methods Strong professional agreement among a group of experts from the French-Speaking Cellular Haematology Group (GFHC) was obtained.
Results The following two proposals emerged from the consensus: (1) stratification of comments into three parts upon the discovery of an anomaly in blood cell analysis and (2) selection and/or redefinition of the terms recommended for designating the cell types found in normal and pathological peripheral blood.
Conclusions The recommendations can help biologists who are currently undergoing the process of accreditation.
- PERIPHERAL BLOOD
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Handling editor Mary Frances McMullin
Contributors FT and XT designed the study. FT, A-CG, FG, VB, EC, JPH, J-FL, VL, DL, BP and XT constituted the expert panel from the GFHC study group. J-YC, GD and VU were the physicians who carefully revised the manuscript. All the authors participated to the writing and reviewing of the manuscript.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.