Ethical evaluation of reflex and reflective testing in conformity with ISO 15189:2022 at the value-based laboratory medicine era
Résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to evaluate the ethical dimensions of reflex and reflective testing (RRT) within the framework of value-based laboratory medicine and in alignment with ISO 15189:2022. The study aims to highlight the challenges in guiding and standardizing these practices in an era of value-based medicine. METHODS: The ISO 15189:2022 requirements for quality and competence were examined alongside the IFCC Code of Ethics and relevant literature. The ethical evaluation was structured around the four core principles of bioethics: beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice. Specific ethical issues related to RRT were identified through expert discussion and compared with the ISO standard. RESULTS: The thorough examination reveals that although ISO 15189:2022 does not use the RRT terminology directly, its requirements provide a robust framework for these interventions. Based on beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, RRT interventions align with ISO 15189:2022 and promote value-based laboratory medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Laboratory specialists/professionals must balance the four ethical principles to ensure that the "total testing process" serves the patient's best interest in conformity with ISO 15189:2022. By adopting a strong ethical culture, the profession can successfully transition from being a producer of test results to a key partner in personalized and value-based medicine.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Ethical evaluation of reflex and reflective testing in conformity with ISO 15189:2022 at the value-based laboratory medicine era
- Date Crossref
- 06/07/2026
- Éditeur
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.