Measurement repeatability profiles of eight frequently requested measurands in clinical chemistry determined by duplicate measurements of patient samples. (2nd April 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kallner, Anders; Petersmann, Astrid; Nauck, Matthias; Theodorsson, Elvar
• Is Part Of: Scandinavian journal of clinical & laboratory investigation. Volume 80:Number 3(2020)
• Page Start: 202
• Page End: 209
• Publication Date: 2020-04-02
• Subjects: Dahlberg uncertainty -- reproducibility -- analysis of variance components -- ANOVA; Clinical biochemistry -- Periodicals; Physiology, Pathological -- Periodicals; Physiology, Experimental -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; 616.0072
• DOI: 10.1080/00365513.2020.1716266
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0036-5513

Abstract

Abstract: Measurement uncertainties in clinical chemistry are commonly regarded as heteroscedastic – having a constant relative standard deviation irrespective of the concentration of the measurand. The uncertainty is usually determined at two concentrations using stabilized control materials and assumed to represent the analytical goal. The purpose of the present study was to use duplicates of unselected patient samples to calculate the absolute and relative repeatability component of the intra-laboratory measurement uncertainty from duplicates, using the Dahlberg formula and analysis of variance components. Estimates were made at five different concentration intervals of ALT, AST, Calcium, Cholesterol, Creatinine, CRP, Triglycerides and TSH covering the entire concentration interval of the patient cohort. This partioning allows detailing their repeatability profiles. The calculations of the profiles were based on randomly selected results from sets of duplicates ranging from 12, 000 to 65, 000 pairs. The repeatability of the measurands showed substantial variability within the measuring interval. Therefore, characterizing imprecision profiles as purely homo- or heteroscedastic or by a single number may not be optimal for the intended use. The present data make a case for nuancing the evaluation of analytical goals and minimal differences of measurement results by establishing uncertainty profiles under repeatability conditions, using natural patient samples.