使用可交换样品的普通化学分析物的偏倚评估。

Q1 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Clinical Biochemist Reviews Pub Date : 2014-11-01
Gus Koerbin, Jillian R Tate, Julie Ryan, Graham Rd Jones, Ken A Sikaris, David Kanowski, Maxine Reed, Janice Gill, George Koumantakis, Tina Yen, Andrew St John, Peter E Hickman, Aaron Simpson, Peter Graham
{"title":"使用可交换样品的普通化学分析物的偏倚评估。","authors":"Gus Koerbin,&nbsp;Jillian R Tate,&nbsp;Julie Ryan,&nbsp;Graham Rd Jones,&nbsp;Ken A Sikaris,&nbsp;David Kanowski,&nbsp;Maxine Reed,&nbsp;Janice Gill,&nbsp;George Koumantakis,&nbsp;Tina Yen,&nbsp;Andrew St John,&nbsp;Peter E Hickman,&nbsp;Aaron Simpson,&nbsp;Peter Graham","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Harmonisation of reference intervals for routine general chemistry analytes has been a goal for many years. Analytical bias may prevent this harmonisation. To determine if analytical bias is present when comparing methods, the use of commutable samples, or samples that have the same properties as the clinical samples routinely analysed, should be used as reference samples to eliminate the possibility of matrix effect. The use of commutable samples has improved the identification of unacceptable analytical performance in the Netherlands and Spain. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) has undertaken a pilot study using commutable samples in an attempt to determine not only country specific reference intervals but to make them comparable between countries. Australia and New Zealand, through the Australasian Association of Clinical Biochemists (AACB), have also undertaken an assessment of analytical bias using commutable samples and determined that of the 27 general chemistry analytes studied, 19 showed sufficiently small between method biases as to not prevent harmonisation of reference intervals. Application of evidence based approaches including the determination of analytical bias using commutable material is necessary when seeking to harmonise reference intervals. </p>","PeriodicalId":34924,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Biochemist Reviews","volume":"35 4","pages":"203-11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4310060/pdf/cbr-35-203.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bias Assessment of General Chemistry Analytes using Commutable Samples.\",\"authors\":\"Gus Koerbin,&nbsp;Jillian R Tate,&nbsp;Julie Ryan,&nbsp;Graham Rd Jones,&nbsp;Ken A Sikaris,&nbsp;David Kanowski,&nbsp;Maxine Reed,&nbsp;Janice Gill,&nbsp;George Koumantakis,&nbsp;Tina Yen,&nbsp;Andrew St John,&nbsp;Peter E Hickman,&nbsp;Aaron Simpson,&nbsp;Peter Graham\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Harmonisation of reference intervals for routine general chemistry analytes has been a goal for many years. Analytical bias may prevent this harmonisation. To determine if analytical bias is present when comparing methods, the use of commutable samples, or samples that have the same properties as the clinical samples routinely analysed, should be used as reference samples to eliminate the possibility of matrix effect. The use of commutable samples has improved the identification of unacceptable analytical performance in the Netherlands and Spain. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) has undertaken a pilot study using commutable samples in an attempt to determine not only country specific reference intervals but to make them comparable between countries. Australia and New Zealand, through the Australasian Association of Clinical Biochemists (AACB), have also undertaken an assessment of analytical bias using commutable samples and determined that of the 27 general chemistry analytes studied, 19 showed sufficiently small between method biases as to not prevent harmonisation of reference intervals. Application of evidence based approaches including the determination of analytical bias using commutable material is necessary when seeking to harmonise reference intervals. </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34924,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Biochemist Reviews\",\"volume\":\"35 4\",\"pages\":\"203-11\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4310060/pdf/cbr-35-203.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Biochemist Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Biochemist Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

统一常规普通化学分析的参考区间是多年来的目标。分析上的偏见可能会阻碍这种协调。为了确定在比较方法时是否存在分析偏差,应使用可交换样品或与常规分析的临床样品具有相同性质的样品作为参考样品,以消除基质效应的可能性。在荷兰和西班牙,可交换样品的使用改善了对不可接受分析性能的识别。国际临床化学和实验室医学联合会进行了一项使用可交换样品的试验性研究,以期不仅确定具体国家的参考间隔,而且使它们在各国之间具有可比性。澳大利亚和新西兰,通过澳大利亚临床生物化学家协会(AACB),也使用可交换样品对分析偏差进行了评估,并确定在所研究的27种普通化学分析中,19种方法之间的偏差足够小,不会妨碍参考区间的协调。在寻求协调参考区间时,应用基于证据的方法,包括使用可交换材料确定分析偏差是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bias Assessment of General Chemistry Analytes using Commutable Samples.

Harmonisation of reference intervals for routine general chemistry analytes has been a goal for many years. Analytical bias may prevent this harmonisation. To determine if analytical bias is present when comparing methods, the use of commutable samples, or samples that have the same properties as the clinical samples routinely analysed, should be used as reference samples to eliminate the possibility of matrix effect. The use of commutable samples has improved the identification of unacceptable analytical performance in the Netherlands and Spain. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) has undertaken a pilot study using commutable samples in an attempt to determine not only country specific reference intervals but to make them comparable between countries. Australia and New Zealand, through the Australasian Association of Clinical Biochemists (AACB), have also undertaken an assessment of analytical bias using commutable samples and determined that of the 27 general chemistry analytes studied, 19 showed sufficiently small between method biases as to not prevent harmonisation of reference intervals. Application of evidence based approaches including the determination of analytical bias using commutable material is necessary when seeking to harmonise reference intervals.

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
Clinical Biochemist Reviews
Clinical Biochemist Reviews Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Clinical Biochemistry
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Digital Disruption in Healthcare and its Impact on Laboratory Services Standardisation of Dietary and Medication Restrictions for Urine 5-Hydroxyindoleacetic Acid (5-HIAA) Collection Diagnostic Evaluation of Renal Tubular Acidosis: A Clinical Biochemistry Perspective Digoxin: Review of Current Laboratory Practice and Considerations Proceedings of the Australasian Association of Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine's 2021 Virtual Scientific Conference.
×
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