I don't think it's necessary to do this if it's really to prevent the paper from being faked. In fact, in my opinion, in recent years, if the laboratory sheets are not signed by inspectors, they are mostly fake, because I have observed the operation mode of their laboratory departments in several hospitals here, including when I was an intern in anzhen hospital, Beijing, and I have also seen the staff of similar operating laboratories sign the laboratory sheets, and then save the records and send them out. Some hospitals have computer signatures. Imagine that if a single department tampered with their laboratory sheet, they could only change the copy, and it was impossible to operate it in the laboratory. Not everyone can change the password of laboratory data. Unless it's base fraud, there's no clue. Therefore, at present, I require that the test sheet must be signed by the relevant laboratory staff before I approve it, otherwise it will be regarded as fraud! The researcher has never heard of signing a laboratory sheet. Does the researcher have a certificate of inspection doctor? No, according to hospital regulations, you have to be qualified to sign. For example, pharmacists sign prescriptions for drugs prescribed, so some hospitals have scientific research pharmacies specializing in drug management, so should researchers also sign? This is obviously out of order. Moreover, the signature of the researcher can prove what is responsible, which sometimes leads to more doubts. Personal thoughts, not representing the public, are improperly pointed out.