Christina M Parrinello1, Morgan E Grams2, Yingying Sang1, David Couper3, Lisa M Wruck3, Danni Li4, John H Eckfeldt4, Elizabeth Selvin5, Josef Coresh6. 1. Department of Epidemiology and the Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD; 2. Department of Epidemiology and the Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD; Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD; 3. Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; 4. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; 5. Department of Epidemiology and the Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD; Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. 6. Department of Epidemiology and the Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD; Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. coresh@jhu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extreme values that arise for any reason, including those through nonlaboratory measurement procedure-related processes (inadequate mixing, evaporation, mislabeling), lead to outliers and inflate errors in recalibration studies. We present an approach termed iterative outlier removal (IOR) for identifying such outliers. METHODS: We previously identified substantial laboratory drift in uric acid measurements in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study over time. Serum uric acid was originally measured in 1990-1992 on a Coulter DACOS instrument using an uricase-based measurement procedure. To recalibrate previous measured concentrations to a newer enzymatic colorimetric measurement procedure, uric acid was remeasured in 200 participants from stored plasma in 2011-2013 on a Beckman Olympus 480 autoanalyzer. To conduct IOR, we excluded data points >3 SDs from the mean difference. We continued this process using the resulting data until no outliers remained. RESULTS: IOR detected more outliers and yielded greater precision in simulation. The original mean difference (SD) in uric acid was 1.25 (0.62) mg/dL. After 4 iterations, 9 outliers were excluded, and the mean difference (SD) was 1.23 (0.45) mg/dL. Conducting only one round of outlier removal (standard approach) would have excluded 4 outliers [mean difference (SD) = 1.22 (0.51) mg/dL]. Applying the recalibration (derived from Deming regression) from each approach to the original measurements, the prevalence of hyperuricemia (>7 mg/dL) was 28.5% before IOR and 8.5% after IOR. CONCLUSIONS: IOR is a useful method for removal of extreme outliers irrelevant to recalibrating laboratory measurements, and identifies more extraneous outliers than the standard approach.
BACKGROUND: Extreme values that arise for any reason, including those through nonlaboratory measurement procedure-related processes (inadequate mixing, evaporation, mislabeling), lead to outliers and inflate errors in recalibration studies. We present an approach termed iterative outlier removal (IOR) for identifying such outliers. METHODS: We previously identified substantial laboratory drift in uric acid measurements in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study over time. Serum uric acid was originally measured in 1990-1992 on a Coulter DACOS instrument using an uricase-based measurement procedure. To recalibrate previous measured concentrations to a newer enzymatic colorimetric measurement procedure, uric acid was remeasured in 200 participants from stored plasma in 2011-2013 on a Beckman Olympus 480 autoanalyzer. To conduct IOR, we excluded data points >3 SDs from the mean difference. We continued this process using the resulting data until no outliers remained. RESULTS: IOR detected more outliers and yielded greater precision in simulation. The original mean difference (SD) in uric acid was 1.25 (0.62) mg/dL. After 4 iterations, 9 outliers were excluded, and the mean difference (SD) was 1.23 (0.45) mg/dL. Conducting only one round of outlier removal (standard approach) would have excluded 4 outliers [mean difference (SD) = 1.22 (0.51) mg/dL]. Applying the recalibration (derived from Deming regression) from each approach to the original measurements, the prevalence of hyperuricemia (>7 mg/dL) was 28.5% before IOR and 8.5% after IOR. CONCLUSIONS: IOR is a useful method for removal of extreme outliers irrelevant to recalibrating laboratory measurements, and identifies more extraneous outliers than the standard approach.
Authors: W Greg Miller; Gary L Myers; Edward R Ashwood; Anthony A Killeen; Edward Wang; Linda M Thienpont; Lothar Siekmann Journal: Arch Pathol Lab Med Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 5.534
Authors: Julie L V Shaw; Ashley Cohen; Danijela Konforte; Tina Binesh-Marvasti; David A Colantonio; Khosrow Adeli Journal: Clin Biochem Date: 2013-12-04 Impact factor: 3.281
Authors: Christina M Parrinello; Morgan E Grams; David Couper; Christie M Ballantyne; Ron C Hoogeveen; John H Eckfeldt; Elizabeth Selvin; Josef Coresh Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2015-05-07 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Elizabeth Selvin; Jane Manzi; Lesley A Stevens; Frederick Van Lente; David A Lacher; Andrew S Levey; Josef Coresh Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Elizabeth Selvin; Stephen P Juraschek; John Eckfeldt; Andrew S Levey; Lesley A Inker; Josef Coresh Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2012-11-21 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Pamela L Lutsey; Christina M Parrinello; Jeffrey R Misialek; Andy N Hoofnagle; Clark M Henderson; Thomas J Laha; Erin D Michos; John H Eckfeldt; Elizabeth Selvin Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2016-09-30 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Ralph D Whitehead; Nicole D Ford; Carine Mapango; Laird J Ruth; Ming Zhang; Rosemary L Schleicher; Sarah Ngalombi; Siti Halati; Martin Ahimbisibwe; Abdelrahman Lubowa; Jesse Sheftel; Sherry A Tanumihardjo; Maria Elena D Jefferds Journal: Exp Biol Med (Maywood) Date: 2021-01-19
Authors: Flavio H Beraldo; Daniel Palmer; Sara Memar; David I Wasserman; Wai-Jane V Lee; Shuai Liang; Samantha D Creighton; Benjamin Kolisnyk; Matthew F Cowan; Justin Mels; Talal S Masood; Chris Fodor; Mohammed A Al-Onaizi; Robert Bartha; Tom Gee; Lisa M Saksida; Timothy J Bussey; Stephen S Strother; Vania F Prado; Boyer D Winters; Marco Am Prado Journal: Elife Date: 2019-12-11 Impact factor: 8.140