Mentzer index
blood test
The Mentzer index, described in 1973 by William C. Mentzer, is the MCV divided by the RBC count. It is said to be helpful in differentiating iron deficiency anemia from beta thalassemia trait.
Mentzer Index
=
MCV (fL)
RBC (millions/
μ
L
)
{\displaystyle {\text{Mentzer Index}}={\frac {\text{MCV (fL)}}{{\text{RBC (millions/}}\mu L{\text{)}}}}}
The index is calculated from the results of a complete blood count. If the quotient of the mean corpuscular volume (MCV, in fL) divided by the red blood cell count (RBC, in million per microliter) is less than 13, β-thalassemia trait is said to be more likely. If the result is greater than 13, then iron-deficiency anemia is said to be more likely.
The principle involved is as follows: In iron deficiency, the marrow cannot produce as many RBCs and they are small (microcytic), so the RBC count and the MCV will both be low, and as a result, the index will be greater than 13. Conversely, in thalassemia, which is a disorder of globin synthesis, the number of RBCs produced is normal, but the cells are smaller and more fragile. Therefore, the RBC count is normal, but the MCV is low, so the index will be less than 13.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Mentzer index” is blood test. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Mentzer, index and blood, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “blood test” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 18, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q6817662. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1973.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Mentzer index”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Mentzer index primary sources, Mentzer index archive and Mentzer research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Mentzer index”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Mentzer index” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.