Literature DB >> 14578313

The Guide to expression of uncertainty in measurement approach for estimating uncertainty: an appraisal.

Jesper Kristiansen1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of the Guide to Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) is to harmonize the different practices for estimating and reporting uncertainty of measurement. Although there are clear advantages in having a common approach for evaluating uncertainty, application of the GUM approach to chemistry measurements is not straightforward. In the above commentary, Krouwer suggests that the GUM approach should not be applied to diagnostic assays, because (a) the quality of diagnostic assays is to low, and (b) the GUM uncertainty intervals are too narrow to predict the outliers that occasionally trouble these methods.
METHODS: Some of the examples presented by Krouwer are reviewed. Sodium measurements are modeled mathematically to illustrate the GUM approach to uncertainty. A standardized uncertainty evaluation process is presented.
RESULTS: Modeling of sodium measurements demonstrates how the GUM uncertainty interval reflects the treatment of a bias: The width of the uncertainty interval varied depending on whether a correction for a calibrator lot bias was applied, but in both cases it was consistent with the distribution of measurement results. Expanding the uncertainty interval to include outliers runs counter to the definition of uncertainty. Used appropriately, the GUM uncertainty can be helpful in detecting outliers. In standardizing the uncertainty evaluation, the importance of the analytical imprecision and traceability was emphasized. It is problematic that manufacturers of commercial assays rarely inform about the uncertainty of the values assigned to the calibrators. As demonstrated by an example, external quality-assurance data may be used to estimate this uncertainty.
CONCLUSIONS: The GUM uncertainty should be applied to measurements in laboratory medicine because it may actually support the forces that drive the work on improving the quality of measurement procedures. However, it is important that the GUM approach is made more manageable by standardizing the uncertainty evaluation procedure as much as possible. It is essential to focus on the traceability and uncertainty of calibrators and reagents supplied by manufacturers of assays. Information about uncertainty is necessary in the evaluation of the uncertainty associated with manufacturers' measurement procedures, and in general it may force manufacturers to increase their efforts in improving the metrologic and analytical quality of their products.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14578313     DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2003.021469

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem        ISSN: 0009-9147            Impact factor:   8.327


  8 in total

1.  Uncertainty of measurement in quantitative medical testing: a laboratory implementation guide.

Authors:  G H White; I Farrance
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2004

2.  Two evaluation budgets for the measurement uncertainty of glucose in clinical chemistry.

Authors:  Hui Chen; Ling Zhang; Xiaoyun Bi; Xiaoling Deng
Journal:  Korean J Lab Med       Date:  2011-06-28

3.  Working towards accreditation by the International Standards Organization 15189 Standard: how to validate an in-house developed method an example of lead determination in whole blood by electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry.

Authors:  Carine Garcia Hejl; Jose Manuel Ramirez; Philippe Vest; Denis Chianea; Christophe Renard
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 3.464

4.  Analysis of 25 C NBOMe in Seized Blotters by HPTLC and GC-MS.

Authors:  Boris Duffau; Cristian Camargo; Marcelo Kogan; Edwar Fuentes; Bruce Kennedy Cassels
Journal:  J Chromatogr Sci       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.618

Review 5.  Minimum requirements for the estimation of measurement uncertainty: Recommendations of the joint Working group for uncertainty of measurement of the CSMBLM and CCMB.

Authors:  Ivana Ćelap; Ines Vukasović; Gordana Juričić; Ana-Maria Šimundić
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2017-10-15       Impact factor: 2.313

6.  Analytical robustness of nine common assays: frequency of outliers and extreme differences identified by a large number of duplicate measurements.

Authors:  Stefanie Neubig; Anne Grotevendt; Anders Kallner; Matthias Nauck; Astrid Petersmann
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 2.313

7.  Cross-Sectional Associations between Dietary Daily Nicotinamide Intake and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer Survivors, 2 to 10 Years Post-Diagnosis.

Authors:  Wenbo Wu; Martijn J L Bours; Annaleen Koole; Marlou-Floor Kenkhuis; Simone J P M Eussen; Stephanie O Breukink; Frederik-Jan van Schooten; Matty P Weijenberg; Geja J Hageman
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2021-10-21       Impact factor: 5.717

8.  Hemolytic specimens in complete blood cell count: Red cell parameters could be revised by plasma free hemoglobin.

Authors:  Zhaoyang Peng; Wenqing Xiang; Jianming Zhou; Jiajia Cao; Zhe Li; Hui Gao; Junfeng Zhang; Hongqiang Shen
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2020-01-22       Impact factor: 2.352

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.