顶空气相色谱法测量血液酒精浓度(BAC)的不确定性:不同策略的比较

IF 0.8 4区 工程技术 Q4 CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL Accreditation and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-02-06 DOI:10.1007/s00769-023-01571-w
R. García-Repetto, M. L. Soria-Sánchez
{"title":"顶空气相色谱法测量血液酒精浓度(BAC)的不确定性:不同策略的比较","authors":"R. García-Repetto,&nbsp;M. L. Soria-Sánchez","doi":"10.1007/s00769-023-01571-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Analysis of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is a routine analysis performed in many forensic laboratories. As BAC results are usually contested in court, measurement uncertainty (MU) becomes a critical topic. This contribution reports the results of an investigation of the major sources of uncertainty affecting BAC determinations and compares two different approaches to the quantification of the corresponding measurement uncertainty in routine BAC determinations. First, a bottom-up approach with method validation data was used to evaluate and estimate the MU of the analytical method. The interplay between the different sources of uncertainty was characterized using a cause-and-effect diagram, their contributions were evaluated, and they were combined using standard methods for uncertainty propagation to derive the overall uncertainty of the analytical method. Second, a top-down approach is presented where MU is estimated from long-term results obtained in proficiency testing. Comparison and validation of the results of the two approaches suggests that the top-down approach yielded a reasonable evaluation of MU while also being much simpler and more cost-effective than the bottom-up approach.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":454,"journal":{"name":"Accreditation and Quality Assurance","volume":"29 1","pages":"55 - 68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measurement uncertainty of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) by headspace gas chromatography: comparison of different strategies\",\"authors\":\"R. García-Repetto,&nbsp;M. L. Soria-Sánchez\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00769-023-01571-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Analysis of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is a routine analysis performed in many forensic laboratories. As BAC results are usually contested in court, measurement uncertainty (MU) becomes a critical topic. This contribution reports the results of an investigation of the major sources of uncertainty affecting BAC determinations and compares two different approaches to the quantification of the corresponding measurement uncertainty in routine BAC determinations. First, a bottom-up approach with method validation data was used to evaluate and estimate the MU of the analytical method. The interplay between the different sources of uncertainty was characterized using a cause-and-effect diagram, their contributions were evaluated, and they were combined using standard methods for uncertainty propagation to derive the overall uncertainty of the analytical method. Second, a top-down approach is presented where MU is estimated from long-term results obtained in proficiency testing. Comparison and validation of the results of the two approaches suggests that the top-down approach yielded a reasonable evaluation of MU while also being much simpler and more cost-effective than the bottom-up approach.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":454,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accreditation and Quality Assurance\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"55 - 68\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accreditation and Quality Assurance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00769-023-01571-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accreditation and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00769-023-01571-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

血液酒精浓度(BAC)分析是许多法医实验室进行的常规分析。由于 BAC 结果通常会在法庭上引起争议,因此测量不确定性 (MU) 成为了一个重要的课题。本文报告了对影响 BAC 测定的主要不确定性来源的调查结果,并比较了两种不同的方法,以量化常规 BAC 测定中相应的测量不确定性。首先,采用自下而上的方法,利用方法验证数据来评估和估计分析方法的 MU。使用因果图描述不同不确定度来源之间的相互作用,评估它们的贡献,并使用不确定度传播的标准方法将它们结合起来,得出分析方法的总体不确定度。其次,介绍了一种自上而下的方法,即根据能力测试中获得的长期结果估算 MU。对两种方法的结果进行比较和验证后发现,自上而下的方法可以对 MU 进行合理的评估,而且比自下而上的方法更简单、更经济。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Measurement uncertainty of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) by headspace gas chromatography: comparison of different strategies

Analysis of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is a routine analysis performed in many forensic laboratories. As BAC results are usually contested in court, measurement uncertainty (MU) becomes a critical topic. This contribution reports the results of an investigation of the major sources of uncertainty affecting BAC determinations and compares two different approaches to the quantification of the corresponding measurement uncertainty in routine BAC determinations. First, a bottom-up approach with method validation data was used to evaluate and estimate the MU of the analytical method. The interplay between the different sources of uncertainty was characterized using a cause-and-effect diagram, their contributions were evaluated, and they were combined using standard methods for uncertainty propagation to derive the overall uncertainty of the analytical method. Second, a top-down approach is presented where MU is estimated from long-term results obtained in proficiency testing. Comparison and validation of the results of the two approaches suggests that the top-down approach yielded a reasonable evaluation of MU while also being much simpler and more cost-effective than the bottom-up approach.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accreditation and Quality Assurance
Accreditation and Quality Assurance 工程技术-分析化学
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
22.20%
发文量
39
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Accreditation and Quality Assurance has established itself as the leading information and discussion forum for all aspects relevant to quality, transparency and reliability of measurement results in chemical and biological sciences. The journal serves the information needs of researchers, practitioners and decision makers dealing with quality assurance and quality management, including the development and application of metrological principles and concepts such as traceability or measurement uncertainty in the following fields: environment, nutrition, consumer protection, geology, metallurgy, pharmacy, forensics, clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, and microbiology.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Certification of the total element mass fractions in UME EnvCRM 03 soil sample via a joint research project Association between blood lead levels and socio-demographic factors among outpatient children in Ningbo, China Proficiency tests for analysis of pesticide residues in kimchi cabbage and ginseng in South Korea from 2008 to 2020 Points to consider when establishing an equipment calibration programme in a conventional food microbiology laboratory for ISO/IEC 17025:2017 accreditation purpose Approaches for the production of reference materials with qualitative properties—The new International Standard ISO 33406
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1