Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
Research ArticleClinical Review

Interpretating Normal Values and Reference Ranges for Laboratory Tests

Nancy Doles, May Ye Mon, Arika Shaikh, Samantha Mitchell, Disha Patel, Dean Seehusen and Gurmukh Singh
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine January 2025, 38 (1) 174-179; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2024.240224R1
Nancy Doles
From the Department of Family Medicine (ND, AS, SM, DP, DS); Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, GA (MYM).
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
May Ye Mon
From the Department of Family Medicine (ND, AS, SM, DP, DS); Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, GA (MYM).
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Arika Shaikh
From the Department of Family Medicine (ND, AS, SM, DP, DS); Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, GA (MYM).
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Samantha Mitchell
From the Department of Family Medicine (ND, AS, SM, DP, DS); Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, GA (MYM).
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Disha Patel
From the Department of Family Medicine (ND, AS, SM, DP, DS); Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, GA (MYM).
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dean Seehusen
From the Department of Family Medicine (ND, AS, SM, DP, DS); Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, GA (MYM).
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gurmukh Singh
From the Department of Family Medicine (ND, AS, SM, DP, DS); Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, GA (MYM).
MD, PhD, MBA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Sikaris KA
    . Enhancing the clinical value of medical laboratory testing. Clin Biochem Rev 2017;38:107–14.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Shaik T,
    2. Mahmood R,
    3. Kanagala SG,
    4. et al
    . Lab testing overload: a comprehensive analysis of overutilization in hospital-based settings. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) 2024;37:312–6.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Zhang Z,
    2. Citardi D,
    3. Xing A,
    4. Luo X,
    5. Lu Y,
    6. He Z
    . Patient challenges and needs in comprehending laboratory test results: mixed methods study. J Med Internet Res 2020;22:e18725.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Giardina TD,
    2. Baldwin J,
    3. Nystrom DT,
    4. Sittig DF,
    5. Singh H
    . Patient perceptions of receiving test results via online portals: a mixed-methods study. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2018;25:440–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Vipler B
    . “What’s Lymphoma” – Risks posed by immediate release of test results to patients. N Engl J Med 2024;390:1064–6.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    Blood donor selection: guidelines on assessing donor suitability for blood donation. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012. 4, General donor assessment. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK138219/.
  7. 7.↵
    College of American Pathologists Laboratory Quality Solutions. Cardiac markers, CAR-B 2024; Diagnostic Immunology Survey S-C 2022; Chemistry and Therapeutic drug monitoring C-B 2022.
  8. 8.↵
    1. Pum J
    . Chapter Six-A practical guide to validation and verification of analytical methods in the clinical laboratory. Adv Clin Che 2019;90:215–81.
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    Hemoglobin. MedlinePlus [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine (US). Available at: https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/003645.htm#:∼.
  10. 10.↵
    1. Kim HS
    . Blood glucose measurement: is serum equal to plasma? Diabetes Metab J 2016;40:365–6.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Rajan S,
    2. Tosh P,
    3. Isaac M,
    4. et al
    . Comparison of hemoglobin values obtained by arterial blood gas analysis versus laboratory method during major head-and-neck surgeries. Anesth Essays Res 2022;16:84–8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Tate JR,
    2. Meyer GL
    . Harmonization of clinical laboratory test results. EJIFCC 2016;27:5–14.eCollection 2016.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Ceriotti F
    . Harmonization initiatives in Europe. EJIFCC 2016;27:23–9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Piéroni L,
    2. Bargnoux AS,
    3. Cristol JP,
    4. Cavalier E,
    5. Delanaye P
    . Did creatinine standardization give benefits to the evaluation of glomerular filtration rate? EJIFCC 2017;28:251–7.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Baird MF,
    2. Graham SM,
    3. Baker JS,
    4. Bickerstaff GF
    . Creatine-kinase- and exercise-related muscle damage implications for muscle performance and recovery. J Nutr Metab 2012;2012:960363.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Lowe D,
    2. Sanvictores T,
    3. Zubair M,
    4. John S
    . Alkaline Phosphatase. 2023 Oct 29. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan.
  17. 17.↵
    1. Sharma U,
    2. Pal D,
    3. Prasad R
    . Alkaline phosphatase: an overview. Indian J Clin Biochem 2014;29:269–78.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Skaaland H,
    2. Larstorp ACK,
    3. Lindberg M,
    4. Jacobsen D
    . Reference values for osmolal gap in healthy subjects and in medical inpatients. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2020;80:1–5.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Weir CB,
    2. Jan A
    . BMI Classification Percentile and Cut Off Points. [Updated 2023 Jun 26]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK541070.
  20. 20.↵
    1. Must A,
    2. Spadano J,
    3. Coakley EH,
    4. Field AE,
    5. Colditz G,
    6. Dietz WH
    . The disease burden associated with overweight and obesity. JAMA 1999;282:1523–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    1. El-Khoury JM,
    2. Badrick T,
    3. Theodorsson E
    . Time to reevaluate the 95% inclusion criteria for defining reference intervals? Clin Chem 2024;70:700–2.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Reza HS,
    2. Ali Z,
    3. Tara H,
    4. Ali B
    . Age-specific reference ranges of prostate-specific antigen in the elderly of Amirkola: a population-based study. Asian J Urol 2021;8:183–8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Singh G
    . Serum free light chain assay and κ/λ ratio: performance in patients without monoclonal gammopathies – high false positive rate. Am J Clin Pathol 2016;146:207–14.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Singh G
    . Serum and urine protein electrophoresis and serum free light chain assays in the diagnosis and monitoring of monoclonal gammopathies. J Appl Lab Med 2020;5:1358–71.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Singh G
    . Free monoclonal immunoglobulin light chains in serum and urine. 21st Century Pathology 2023;3:143–54.
    OpenUrl
  26. 26.↵
    1. Billett HH
    . Clinical Methods: The History, Physical, and Laboratory Examinations. 3rd edition. Chapter 151 Hemoglobin and Hematocrit. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK259/.
  27. 27.↵
    1. MacDonald R
    . Red cell 2,3-diphosphoglycerate and oxygen affinity. Anaesthesia 1977;32:544–53.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Stoppler MC
    . Ferritin blood test. MedicineNet, Inc [Internet]. May 21, 2024. Available at: https://www.medicinenet.com/ferritin_blood_test/article.htm.
  29. 29.↵
    1. Hoffman M,
    2. Winsborough H,
    3. Gopal A
    . HDL: the good cholesterol. WebMD LLC [Internet]. January 8, 2024. Available at: https://www.webmd.com/cholesterol-management/hdl-cholesterol-the-good-cholesterol.
  30. 30.↵
    1. Hosten AO
    . Clinical Methods: The History, Physical, and Laboratory Examinations. 3rd ed. Chapter 193 BUN and Creatinine. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK305/.
  31. 31.↵
    1. Abbassi-Ghanavati M,
    2. Greer LG,
    3. Cunningham FG
    . Pregnancy and laboratory studies: a reference table for clinicians. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:1326–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  32. 32.↵
    1. Cheung AS,
    2. Lim HY,
    3. Cook T,
    4. et al
    . Approach to interpreting common laboratory pathology tests in transgender individuals. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2021;106:893–901.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. Powe CE,
    2. Evans MK,
    3. Wenger J,
    4. et al
    . Vitamin D-binding protein and vitamin D status of black Americans and white Americans. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1991–2000.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  34. 34.↵
    1. Bellini MI,
    2. Nozdrin M,
    3. Naesens M,
    4. Martins PN
    . Eliminating race from eGFR calculations: impact on living donor programs. Transpl Int 2022;35:10787.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Sandoval Y,
    2. Apple FS,
    3. Saenger AK,
    4. Collinson PO,
    5. Wu AHB,
    6. Jaffe AS
    . 99th percentile upper-reference limit of cardiac troponin and the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction., Clin Chem 2020;66:1167–80.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    1. Bagai A,
    2. Alexander KP,
    3. Berger JS,
    4. et al
    . Use of troponin assay 99th percentile as the decision level for myocardial infarction diagnosis. Am Heart J 2017;190:135–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    1. Saleh L,
    2. Mueller D,
    3. von Eckardstein A
    . Analytical and clinical performance of the new Fujirebio 25-OH vitamin D assay, a comparison with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and three other automated assays. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:617–25.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    1. Khan KM,
    2. Jialal I
    . Folic Acid Deficiency. 2023 Jun 26. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK535377/.
  39. 39.↵
    1. Singh G,
    2. Hamdan H,
    3. Singh V
    . Clinical utility of serum folate measurement in tertiary care patients: argument for revising reference range for serum folate from 3.0ng/mL to 13.0ng/mL. Pract Lab Med 2015;1:35–41.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    1. Kozman D,
    2. Mattox S,
    3. Singh G
    . Serum folate of less than 7.0 ng/mL is a marker of malnutrition. Lab Med 2020;51:507–11.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    1. Singh G,
    2. Bonham AJ
    . Vitamin D: a predictive equation for vitamin D replacement. J Am Board Fam Med 2014;27:495–509.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  42. 42.↵
    1. Singh G,
    2. Drees B
    . Normal, healthy, and optimum level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D and required daily intake of vitamin D. Austin Journal of Nutrition and Food sciences 2015;3:1060–3.
    OpenUrl
  43. 43.↵
    1. Magnussen C,
    2. Ojeda FM,
    3. Leong DP
    , Global Cardiovascular Risk Consortiumet al. Global effect of modifiable risk factors on cardiovascular disease and mortality. N Engl J Med 2023;389:1273–85.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family     Medicine: 38 (1)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 38, Issue 1
January-February 2025
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Interpretating Normal Values and Reference Ranges for Laboratory Tests
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
2 + 4 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Interpretating Normal Values and Reference Ranges for Laboratory Tests
Nancy Doles, May Ye Mon, Arika Shaikh, Samantha Mitchell, Disha Patel, Dean Seehusen, Gurmukh Singh
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Jan 2025, 38 (1) 174-179; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2024.240224R1

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Interpretating Normal Values and Reference Ranges for Laboratory Tests
Nancy Doles, May Ye Mon, Arika Shaikh, Samantha Mitchell, Disha Patel, Dean Seehusen, Gurmukh Singh
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Jan 2025, 38 (1) 174-179; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2024.240224R1
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Background Information About Laboratory Testing and Normal Values
    • Notes
    • References
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Non-Surgical Management of Urinary Incontinence
  • Screening and Diagnosis of Type 2 Diabetes in Sickle Cell Disease
Show more Clinical Review

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Communication
  • Comprehensive Metabolic Panel
  • Doctor Patient Relations
  • Family Medicine
  • Health Communication
  • Laboratory Alert Values
  • Medical Decision-Making
  • Reference Ranges
  • Patient Portals

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire