{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017055655296229804, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012567324955116697, 'mean_word_length': 5.445086705202312, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Manual and automated reticulocyte counts

Abstract Manual reticulocyte counts were examined under light microscopy, using the property whereby supravital stain precipitates residual ribosomal RNA versus the automated flow methods, with the suggestion that in the latter there is greater precision and an ability to determine both mature and immature reticulocyte fractions. Three hundred and forty-one venous blood samples of patients were analyzed of whom 224 newborn and the rest adults; 51 males and 66 females, with ages between 0 and 89 years, as part of the laboratory routine for hematological examinations at the Clinical Laboratory of the Hospital Universitário do Oeste do Paraná. This work aimed to compare manual and automated methodologies for reticulocyte countings and evaluate random and systematic errors. The results obtained showed that the difference between the two methods was very small, with an estimated 0·4% systematic error and 3·9% random error. Thus, it has been confirmed that both methods, when well conducted, can reflect precisely the reticulocyte counts for adequate clinical use.