Clinical Chemistry Link to Randox Laboratories Web Site
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 33: 2262-2267, 1987;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Koch, T. R.
Right arrow Articles by Sherwin, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Koch, T. R.
Right arrow Articles by Sherwin, R.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 33, 2262-2267, Copyright © 1987 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Bias and precision of cholesterol analysis by physician's office analyzers

TR Koch, U Mehta, H Lee, K Aziz, S Temel, JA Donlon and R Sherwin
Department of Pathology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore 21201.

We studied the bias and precision of serum cholesterol analysis by physician's office analyzers. Total imprecision (CV range, %) for analysis of serum pools was: Abbott Vision 1.5%-1.9%; Ames Seralyzer 3.9%-4.5%; BMD Reflotron 2.3%-3.8%; Chrometrics Cholesterol Test System 2.3%-2.8%; Kodak DT-60 1.6%-2.2%. The Ames Seralyzer exhibited an excessive between-run component of variation. We collected, from 109 volunteers, samples of venous serum, heparin-treated whole blood, heparin-treated plasma, and fingerstick whole blood, and analyzed each type (where possible) with each system; serum was also analyzed in duplicate (by a proposed Reference Method) at the Centers for Disease Control. For assays with serum, the BMD Reflotron and Kodak DT-60 exhibited negative bias. All systems gave lower results for plasma and whole blood than for serum. All systems except the Kodak DT-60 were less precise for analysis of patients' sera than for analysis of serum pools; between-specimen variables may influence the results of these systems.


The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:


Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
J. H. Stein, C. M. Carlsson, K. Papcke-Benson, J. A. Einerson, P. E. McBride, and D. A. Wiebe
Inaccuracy of Lipid Measurements with the Portable Cholestech L{middle dot}D{middle dot}X Analyzer in Patients with Hypercholesterolemia
Clin. Chem., February 1, 2002; 48(2): 284 - 290.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
B. C Delaney, C. J Hyde, R. J McManus, S. Wilson, D. A Fitzmaurice, S. Jowett, R. Tobias, G. H Thorpe, and F D R. Hobbs
Systematic review of near patient test evaluations in primary care
BMJ, September 25, 1999; 319(7213): 824 - 827.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1987 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.