Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:1751082rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0018935lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:1751082lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0444706lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:1751082lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1707455lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:issue3lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:dateCreated1992-1-29lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:abstractTextTwo electrical conductivity methods of hematocrit (H) measurement, Coulter Counter (CCH) and lonometer (IH), were compared to the microhematocrit (MH) with two different anticoagulants, Li Heparin (Li) and EDTA. The results showed MH-Li is higher than MH-EDTA (mean difference 1.7 vol%). The IH-Li is 1.8 vol% higher than CC H-EDTA. These differences are attributed to osmotic shrinking of red cells by EDTA. The MH-Li and IH-Li correlate very closely (r = .992), and are considered to provide the truest hematocrit values.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:issn0889-7190lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:authorpubmed-author:EvansMMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:authorpubmed-author:GotchFFlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:authorpubmed-author:WestphalDDlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:authorpubmed-author:KaánMMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:authorpubmed-author:TorreyJJlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:authorpubmed-author:MetznerKKlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:authorpubmed-author:PolascheggHHlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:volume37lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:paginationM138-9lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:dateRevised2006-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1751082-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1751082-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1751082-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1751082-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1751082-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1751082-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:1751082-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:articleTitleComparison of conductivity measured hematocrit to microhematocrit.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:affiliationDavies Medical Center, San Francisco, California.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:1751082pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed