ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and CompetencevsISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration
See exactly how ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence controls map to ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence maps to ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration with 9% coverage across 15 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 161 ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence controls identifies 146 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Clause 7: Process requirements – ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 161 controls analysed | 1,120 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 20 control mappings across 1 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 1,120 frameworks.
Superseded batch representation – ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence(20 mappings)
A ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence to ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration controls your existing ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
- Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
- Every gap, with what it requires
- Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number
Why this page shows two different percentages. The 9% in the header counts how many ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.
A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.
Related Comparisons
Other ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence comparisons
Other ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
Cross-framework mappings across 1,120 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 1,120 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence and ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration?
ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence has 161 controls across its framework, while ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration covers 72 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 15 overlapping controls (9% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Clause 7: Process requirements – ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence, where 44 ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence controls have no direct ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration equivalent.
How many controls map between ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence and ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration?
Of 161 total ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence controls, 15 map directly to ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration controls, representing 9% coverage. The remaining 146 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence to ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration?
146 ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence controls have no direct equivalent in ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration. The highest concentration of gaps is in Clause 7: Process requirements – ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence with 44 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.
Which control domains have the most gaps between ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence and ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - General Requirements for Testing and Calibration?
The domain with the highest gap count is Clause 7: Process requirements – ISO 15189:2022 - Medical Laboratories Requirements for Quality and Competence (44 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.
Related Resources
This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are judged interpretations, grounded in the source text of both frameworks, and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.