Clinical Chemistry
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 34: 1058-1061, 1988;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 Sadler, W. A.
Right arrow Articles by Legge, H. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sadler, W. A.
Right arrow Articles by Legge, H. M.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 34, 1058-1061, Copyright © 1988 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

A method for direct estimation of imprecision profiles, with reference to immunoassay data

WA Sadler, MH Smith and HM Legge
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Christchurch Hospital, New Zealand.

A three-parameter model for directly estimating imprecision profiles from replicated immunoassay results is compared with a six-parameter indirect profile model obtained by the usual method of combining error in the raw response measurements with the slope of the standard curve. Direct estimation is likely to be less reliable when based on the limited data collected from a single assay, and may underestimate variability at high concentrations when many results are clustered at the upper end of the concentration range. However, at concentrations near the assay detection limit (often a region of particular interest), direct estimation is superior to the indirect method if a logistic or related function is used as the standard curve model. Direct estimation of imprecision profiles has useful application whenever the internal details of an assay system are not readily available, for example, in analysis of data collected in external surveys.


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


Home page
 Ann Clin BiochemHome page
W. A Sadler
Error models for immunoassays
Ann Clin Biochem, September 1, 2008; 45(5): 481 - 485.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Phil Trans R Soc AHome page
A. J. O'Malley
A Bayesian precision profile for measuring the quality of immunoassay experiments
Phil Trans R Soc A, July 13, 2008; 366(1874): 2301 - 2312.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
D. T. Holmes and K. Buhr
Mathematical Modeling: Assumptions Affect Results.
Clin. Chem., August 1, 2006; 52(8): 1606 - 1608.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
R. Ekins and P. Edwards
Point On the meaning of ""sensitivity""
Clin. Chem., October 1, 1997; 43(10): 1824 - 1831.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1988 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.