Lisa Rosengard May 29:

I suggest: 'relación: albúmina / globulina' is possible, though it could be análitica general o antecedentes generales. Here's a reference to medical abbreviations:
http://diccionario.sedom.es/ (Other possibilities are: adenocarcinoma gástrico; anestesia general; anión gap; ácidos grasos)

Sakshi Garg May 28:

But then again, if Agosto is August then also as the asker says "Why would they keep giving blood results for 2013 in reports for 2017?"

Hernan Casasbuenas May 28:

Agosto - August It looks like it refers to the results dated on August 24 and 13 of 2013

Sakshi Garg May 28:

@Andres Your references don't work... http://www.scielo.org.co/ > Invalid
https://www.southtees.nhs.uk/ > It says We’re Coagulation, Reagent and Contract Manufacturing Experts but nothing in particular for //agregación plaquetaria > platelet aggregation//
The same goes for the other references as well. They have no context of //agregación plaquetaria > platelet aggregation//.... Could you please verify if these are the true references?

Sakshi Garg May 28:

@asker You make a good point. If //"AG 24/13"// and //"AG 16/13"// were referring to dates in 2013, it would not make sense for those same date values to appear repeatedly across medical reports spanning from 2014 to 2017.
Then probably, it seems more likely that //"AG"// is an abbreviation for some type of medical test or measurement, and the numbers 24/13 and 16/13 represent the actual test results or values, rather than dates.

Without being able to see the full medical reports and context, it's difficult to definitively determine what "AG" stands for. However, some possibilities based on common medical abbreviations could include:
Anion Gap (AG) - A measure of unmeasured ions in the blood
Antigen (Ag) - A substance that prompts an immune response
Antiglobulin (AG) - An antibody test
The numbers could represent normal/abnormal ranges for those test values.

Rebecca Hendry (asker) May 28:

Don't think it's an OCR issue Thanks for your comment. The documents don't seem to be scanned, so I don't think it's an OCR issue.

Paul Adie May 28:

. General analysis seems to make the most sense here - could the numbers be an OCR mistake?
https://www.cosnautas.com/en/siglas/2086-ag