Literature DB >> 17397855

Systematic errors in analytical measurement results.

D Brynn Hibbert1.   

Abstract

Definitions of the concepts of bias and recovery are discussed and approaches to dealing with them described. The Guide To Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) recommends correction for all significant systematic effects, but it is also possible to expand measurement uncertainty to take account of uncorrected bias. Run, laboratory and method bias can be defined as components of the bias of a particular measurement result, and can be useful as concepts used in method validation. Estimation of run bias allows a simplification of the estimation of measurement uncertainty. Multivariate calibration brings its own biases that must be quantified and minimised.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17397855     DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2007.03.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chromatogr A        ISSN: 0021-9673            Impact factor:   4.759


  2 in total

Review 1.  Uncertainty in measurement: A review of the procedures for determining uncertainty in measurement and its use in deriving the biological variation of the estimated glomerular filtration rate.

Authors:  Ian Farrance; Tony Badrick; Robert Frenkel
Journal:  Pract Lab Med       Date:  2018-04-05

2.  Development and Validation of Methods for the Determination of Anthocyanins in Physiological Fluids via UHPLC-MSn.

Authors:  Michael Kaiser; Lisa Müller-Ehl; Maike Passon; Andreas Schieber
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 4.411

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.