Impact of laboratory technician experience on the accuracy of laboratory test results in scientific research

Introduction Laboratory tests are crucial in both diagnostics and research. The competence of personnel directly impacts the quality of results. While in diagnostic settings technician expertise is appreciated, this factor is often overlooked in research environments. This study examined the influence of experience on the accuracy of laboratory tests. Methods Two experienced technicians (ExpT) from an ISO15189-certified medical laboratory and two inexperienced PhD students (InexpP) performed an IGFBP3 ELISA, a mTSH multiplex assay, and oligoclonal band electrophoresis. ExpTs followed standard operating procedures, while InexpPs used kit inserts. Duplicate coefficients of variation (CV%) were calculated, and test results were compared. Results Results of the InexpPs showed lower accuracy. For IGFBP3, the mean duplicate CV% was 3.1 % for ExpTs versus 26.2 % for InexpPs. For mTSH the mean duplicate CV% was 4.8 % for ExpTs and 17.4 % for InexpPs. Correlation coefficients between the results of ExpTs for IGFBP3 and mTSH measurements were 0.977 and 0.997, respectively, whereas correlation coefficients between InexpPs and ExpTs' mean results were 0.605 and 0.283 for IGFBP3 and mTSH, respectively. InexpPs failed to produce some electrophoresis bands and introduced errors such as air bubbles and artifacts. Conclusions Less laboratory experience leads to less accurate test results, which may affect the interpretation of these results. To ensure accuracy in research settings, it is important to be aware of laboratory expertise. It is recommended that the experience levels and competence of those who performed the laboratory analysis are reported in scientific methods sections.