Literature DB >> 28740320

Rigorous evaluation of chemical measurement uncertainty: Liquid chromatographic analysis methods using detector response factor calibration.

Blaza Toman1, Michael A Nelson1, Mary Bedner1.   

Abstract

Chemical measurement methods are designed to promote accurate knowledge of a measurand or system. As such, these methods often allow elicitation of latent sources of variability and correlation in experimental data. They typically implement measurement equations that support quantification of effects associated with calibration standards and other known or observed parametric variables. Additionally, multiple samples and calibrants are usually analyzed to assess accuracy of the measurement procedure and repeatability by the analyst. Thus, a realistic assessment of uncertainty for most chemical measurement methods is not purely bottom-up (based on the measurement equation) or top-down (based on the experimental design), but inherently contains elements of both. Confidence in results must be rigorously evaluated for the sources of variability in all of the bottom-up and top-down elements. This type of analysis presents unique challenges due to various statistical correlations among the outputs of measurement equations. One approach is to use a Bayesian hierarchical (BH) model which is intrinsically rigorous, thus making it a straightforward method for use with complex experimental designs, particularly when correlations among data are numerous and difficult to elucidate or explicitly quantify. In simpler cases, careful analysis using GUM Supplement 1 (MC) methods augmented with random effects meta analysis yields similar results to a full BH model analysis. In this article we describe both approaches to rigorous uncertainty evaluation using as examples measurements of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 in solution reference materials via liquid chromatography with UV absorbance detection (LC-UV) and liquid chromatography mass spectrometric detection using isotope dilution (LC-IDMS).

Entities:  

Year:  2017        PMID: 28740320      PMCID: PMC5520676          DOI: 10.1088/1681-7575/aa6404

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Metrologia        ISSN: 0026-1394            Impact factor:   3.157


  4 in total

1.  Extending DerSimonian and Laird's methodology to perform multivariate random effects meta-analyses.

Authors:  Dan Jackson; Ian R White; Simon G Thompson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-05-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions.

Authors:  David Lunn; David Spiegelhalter; Andrew Thomas; Nicky Best
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Chemical purity using quantitative 1H-nuclear magnetic resonance: a hierarchical Bayesian approach for traceable calibrations.

Authors:  Blaza Toman; Michael A Nelson; Katrice A Lippa
Journal:  Metrologia       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 3.157

4.  A matrix-based method of moments for fitting the multivariate random effects model for meta-analysis and meta-regression.

Authors:  Dan Jackson; Ian R White; Richard D Riley
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 2.207

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.